USPTO serial 77040240
µPFC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HABEEB, MYRIAH A
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 µPFC?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Charles P. LaPolla
CHARLES P LAPOLLA OSTROLENK, FABER, GERB & SOFFEN LLP1180 AVE OF THE AMERICAS FL 7NEW YORK, NY 10036-8401UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Semiconductors and integrated circuits | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 30, 2009 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 30, 2009 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 30, 2009 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Feb 18, 2009 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Feb 17, 2009 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 29, 2008 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 27, 2008 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 31, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 23, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 23, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Mar 16, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 15, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |