USPTO serial 78345559
LIDOSE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEE, DOUGLAS
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - SENIOR ATTORNEY
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with LIDOSE?
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 H. Greger
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Drug delivery system combining capsule units and liquid units to facilitate the internal delivery of pharmaceuticals in the body | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 14, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 14, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Sep 14, 2005 | 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 13, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 3, 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. |
| Mar 2, 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. |
| Feb 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 27, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 27, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 27, 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. |
| Jul 24, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 7, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |