USPTO serial 78564240
NEXUS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- YOUNG, CARRIE SKYE
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 NEXUS?
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.
Arlene D. Hanks
ARLENE D HANKS MOORE & VAN ALLEN PLLC430 DAVIS DR STE 500MORRISVILLE, NC 27560UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | Semi-finished plastic products, namely, aramid and aramid-blend fabrics for use in the manufacture of clothing worn by firefighters and utility, industrial and chemical workers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 2010 | 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 31, 2010 | 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 25, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 10, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 15, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 14, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 17, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 16, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 15, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 18, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 18, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 17, 2007 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 7, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 3, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 9, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 5, 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. |
| Dec 4, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 5, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 5, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 23, 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. |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| Oct 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 13, 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. |
| Sep 13, 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. |
| Sep 8, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 22, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |