USPTO serial 77112407
SUPER HAMMER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROSSMAN, MARY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 SUPER HAMMER?
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.
James M. Slattery (Reg. No. 28,380)
JAMES M. SLATTERY BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH & BIRCH, LLPPO BOX 747FALLS CHURCH, VA 22040-0747UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Air-operated power tools, namely, impact wrenches, ratchet wrenches; Power tools, namely, impact wrenches, ratchet wrenches, cordless impact wrenches, cordless ratchet wrenches; pneumatic hammers | 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 1, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2008 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2008 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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 22, 2008 | 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 23, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 22, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 10, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 9, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Jun 9, 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. |
| Jun 7, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 26, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |