USPTO serial 76620779
V3 MILLION POWER SERIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HELFMAN, JUDITH MICHELLE
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with V3 MILLION POWER SERIES?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
GEORGE W. LEWIS
GEORGE W LEWIS JACOBSON HOLMAN PLLCTHE JENIFER BLDG400 7TH ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2201Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | SPOTLIGHTS AND FLASHLIGHTS | ACTIVE | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2010 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 13, 2010 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Mar 19, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 18, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Feb 11, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2009 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| May 19, 2009 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Apr 29, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 23, 2009 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Nov 28, 2008 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Nov 26, 2008 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 14, 2008 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 15, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 14, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 12, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 12, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 12, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 12, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 22, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 18, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Dec 15, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 24, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 17, 2006 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | ATRV | ATTORNEY REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Aug 9, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jan 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jun 28, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 27, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 21, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |