USPTO serial 78292679
RJM-LT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CAPSHAW, DANIEL
- 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 RJM-LT?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Louis H. Reens
LOUIS H REENSST ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS LLP986 BEDFORD ST STE 1STAMFORD, CT 06905-5619Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | POLLUTANT EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR POWER PLANTS AND INDUSTRIAL BOILERS | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by RJM Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by DIESEL & COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by DIESEL & COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 007
- Similar marks named RJM-LT
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 17, 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. |
| Mar 17, 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. |
| Jul 20, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 21, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 10, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 5, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 5, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |