USPTO serial 78181473
REGENERATIVE DOUBLE DUCT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SINGLETON, RUDY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 REGENERATIVE DOUBLE DUCT?
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.
Jeffrey S. Sokol
JEFFREY S SOKOL ANDRUS, SCEALES, STARKE & SAWALL, LLP100 E WISCONSIN AVE STE 1100MILWAUKEE WI, 53202U.S. ARMYGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES, NAMELY DESIGNING DESICCANT-FREE HEATING, VENTILATION AND AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS USING 100% OUTSIDE AIR FOR OTHERS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 30, 2006 | 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. |
| May 27, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 27, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 20, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2005 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Oct 5, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 15, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 3, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 16, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 15, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 26, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 27, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 3, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 2, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 9, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 9, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 6, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 4, 2003 | 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 26, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |