USPTO serial 78660067
PIONEER IN NUCLEUS ARTHROPLASTY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRACEY, KAREN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with PIONEER IN NUCLEUS ARTHROPLASTY?
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
Bloomington, MN
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Timothy A. Czaja
TIMOTHY A CZAJA DICKE, BILLIG & CZAJA PLLC100 S 5TH ST STE 2250MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1235UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 24, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 21, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 18, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 1, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Oct 18, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| May 5, 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 5, 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 18, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 24, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 24, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 19, 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 19, 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 19, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |