USPTO serial 76636578
NP3
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HARDY LUDLOW, TARAH KIM
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with NP3?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Connie J. Mableson
CONNIE J MABLESON LIEBERMAN, DODGE, GERDING & ANDERSON3003 N CENTRAL AVE STE 1800PHOENIX, AZ 85012-2909UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Combined Nickel and Polytetrafluoroethylene used in the plating of metal or metal finishing | ACTIVE | Aug 27, 1986 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2007 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jan 8, 2007 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jun 12, 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. |
| Jun 12, 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. |
| Jun 9, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 22, 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. |
| Nov 22, 2005 | CEAP | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2005 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 18, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 29, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |