USPTO serial 78656327
EEALLPARTS.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUBRAY, KATHERINE M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 EEALLPARTS.COM?
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.
Abdul Aijaff
ABDUL AIJAFF EE ALL PARTS CORPPORATION2960 AIRWAY AVE STE A102COSTA MESA, CA 92626UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electronic parts, assemblies and finished goods, namely-- resistors, capacitors, inductors, transistors,transformers, diodes, integrated circuits, fuses, electrical connectors, assembled printed circuit boards or ceramic hybrids, light-emitting diodes, rectifiers, liquid crystal displays, crystals, crystal oscillators, sensors, transducers, computers, routers, switches, servers,transmitters, receivers, antennas, cable assemblies, and heat sinks | ACTIVE | Jul 31, 2000 |
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 2, 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. |
| Jan 2, 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. |
| Oct 25, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 24, 2007 | 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 24, 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. |
| May 8, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 15, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 22, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 13, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 13, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 7, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | 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 12, 2006 | 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 12, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |