USPTO serial 78208716
REFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WELLS, CHRISTOPHER
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 REFLEX?
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.
MARY C BONNEMA
MARY C BONNEMA MCGARRY BAIR PC171 MONROE AVE NW STE 600GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49503UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Telescopes and binoculars; telescopic rifle sights; night vision monoculars, binoculars and rifle scopes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2009 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Dec 23, 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. |
| Dec 23, 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. |
| May 27, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 20, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 7, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 7, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 7, 2007 | 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 22, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 8, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 26, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 18, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 27, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 24, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 16, 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. |
| Aug 11, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 2, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 2, 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. |
| Jan 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 4, 2004 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jul 14, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |