USPTO serial 78046236
EMACS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMITH, REBECCA A
- 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 EMACS?
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.
BRUCE M GREEN
BRUCE M GREEN OYEN WIGGS GREEN & MUTALA601 W CORDOVA STSTE 480 THE STATIONVANCOUVER, BC V6B 1G1Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | System consisting of magnetic field sensors, communications circuitry, processors, display, controller hardware and related software for use in monitoring and controlling electrolytic reduction cells during the production of aluminum | 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 24, 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. |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Mar 28, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 28, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 16, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 16, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 25, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 1, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 29, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 28, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 10, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 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. |
| May 18, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 10, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 5, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 5, 2004 | 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 17, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 5, 2003 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 5, 2003 | 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. |
| May 21, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 7, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 21, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 15, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |