USPTO serial 77044324
PHLASHLIGHT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RIRIE, VERNA BETH
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - 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 PHLASHLIGHT?
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.
Edward F. Perlman
Douglas R. Wolf Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.600 Atlantic AvenueBoston, MA 02210-2206UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | light emitting devices, namely, laser diodes; light emitting devices, namely, light emitting diodes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 10, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 26, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 26, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| May 29, 2008 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| May 29, 2008 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 25, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 25, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 25, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Oct 23, 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. |
| Sep 26, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | 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 22, 2007 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Aug 22, 2007 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 12, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 26, 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 20, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |