USPTO serial 78682117
PRINCIPLE- SAFE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHARLON, BARNEY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - 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 PRINCIPLE- SAFE?
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.
V.T. Giordano
VT GIORDANO VON MALTITZ, DERENBERG, KUNIN, JANSSEN &60 E 42ND ST RM 4410NEW YORK, NY 10165-0133UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | Automobiles and structural parts therefor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 22, 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. |
| Oct 22, 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. |
| Mar 26, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 5, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 5, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 12, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 12, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Feb 22, 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 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 5, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |