USPTO serial 78529635
INION OPTIMA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRECKENFELD, WILLIAM G
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 INION OPTIMA?
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
FI-33520 Tampere, FI
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
David Ehrlich
DAVID EHRLICH FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU PC866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017-1822UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | surgical implants comprising artificial material for medical, dental and veterinary use | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 28, 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. |
| Jul 25, 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. |
| Dec 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 22, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 19, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 19, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 2007 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 26, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| May 14, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 30, 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. |
| Mar 30, 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. |
| Aug 18, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 14, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 6, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 2, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 15, 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. |
| Jul 14, 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. |
| Jul 14, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 15, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 15, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 20, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |