USPTO serial 78575027
ARMIDA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUBOIS, MICHELLE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 ARMIDA?
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.
William D. Wiese
WILLIAM D WIESE JENKENS & GILCHRIST PC1445 ROSS AVE STE 3200DALLAS, TX 75202-2785UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 045 | Manufacture of wireless security-related equipment to the order and specification of others. | ACTIVE | Mar 1, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 7, 2007 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Nov 6, 2007 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Mar 26, 2007 | GAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2007 | NAUD | REPORT UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 3, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 3, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 27, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 27, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 27, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 26, 2006 | 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. |
| May 11, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 11, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 29, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 21, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 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 21, 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 20, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 5, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |