USPTO serial 78438771
ENFORCER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- THOMAS, AMY E
- 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 ENFORCER?
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.
Robert P. Biddle
ROBERT P BIDDLE BIDDLE & ASSOCIATES PC6300 POWERS FERRY RD STE 600-183ATLANTA, GA 30339UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | MOTOR VEHICLES, NAMELY, AUTOMOBILES FOR POLICE WORK THAT MEET SPECIFIED PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR USE IN POLICE APPLICATIONS, AND STRUCTURAL PARTS AND ENGINES THEREFOR | ACTIVE | Mar 30, 1995 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Jul 27, 2007 | GNS1 | NOTIFICATION OF SUBSEQUENT FINAL EMAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2007 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 9, 2007 | RGRR | REINSTATEMENT GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 22, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 22, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 17, 2007 | 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 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 18, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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 18, 2006 | 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 8, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 9, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 6, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 26, 2005 | 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. |
| 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. |
| Jan 25, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |