USPTO serial 78188787
SAFE GLOW
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PHAM, LANA H
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 SAFE GLOW?
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
Yorba Linda, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
MORLAND C. FISCHER
MORLAND C FISHER2030 MAIN STSTE 1050IRVINE, CA 92614Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | NON-ELECTRIC, PHOTOLUMINESCENT LIGHTING, MARKERS AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE FOR LEADING OCCUPANTS OF A BUILDING TO SAFETY IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY OR DARK CONDITIONS | ACTIVE | Sep 23, 2002 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 20, 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. |
| Apr 20, 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. |
| Apr 20, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 25, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 24, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 19, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 19, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 29, 2003 | 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. |
| May 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |