USPTO serial 78673189
PROTECHTOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEE, DEBRA ANN
- 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 PROTECHTOR?
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
Vitrotec Vidros de Segurança Ltda.
Campo Limpo Paulista - S.P., BR
Other trademarks owned by Vitrotec Vidros de Segurança Ltda.
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Nancy Sabarra
NANCY SABARRA FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & Z866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | finished safety glass, finished armored glass and finished anti-vandalism glass for automotive and vehicle windows and windshields | 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 2, 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 2, 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 4, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 4, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 1, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 17, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 10, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 5, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 10, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Feb 10, 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. |
| Feb 7, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 25, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |