USPTO serial 78581366
THE BRAIN
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 THE BRAIN?
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.
James D. Schweikert
JAMES D SCHWEIKERT MACMILLAN, SOBANSKI & TODD LLC1 MARITIME PLZ FL WATER4TOLEDO, OH 43604-1853UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Automatic mixing valves; hot water heater recirculation control systems comprising circulators and electronic controls; electronically controlled mixing systems for hot water heaters | ACTIVE | Nov 18, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 24, 2007 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 13, 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. |
| May 11, 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. |
| May 11, 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. |
| Apr 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 30, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 28, 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 28, 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 27, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 14, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |