USPTO serial 78114770
POWER-TRAP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BENMAMAN, ALICE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 POWER-TRAP?
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
Manchester, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
J. Scott Evans
J SCOTT EVANS ADAMS SCHWARTZ & EVANS PA2180 TWO WACHOVIA CTR301 S TRYON STCHARLOTTE, NC 28282Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Motors and engines; parts and fittings for motors and engines; exhausts for engines; exhausts incorporating particulate separation devices. | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | Apparatus and instruments for particulate separation, namely electrostatic filtrations devices; apparatus and instruments for measuring particulate levels or pollutant levels in exhaust gases and exhaust particulate separation devices, namely, exhaust filters | ACTIVE | — |
| 012 | Parts for vehicles, namely, vehicle exhausts | 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 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 2, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 22, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 15, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 28, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 23, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 10, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 4, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |