USPTO serial 78702381
UROMAX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WIENER, MICHAEL
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 UROMAX?
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.
Wayne A. Sivertson
WAYNE A SIVERTSON NAWROCKI, ROONEY & SIVERTSON PASTE 401 BROADWAY PL E3433 BROADWAY ST NEMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Balloon Catheters | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 1992 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 25, 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. |
| Oct 25, 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. |
| Oct 3, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 22, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 20, 2006 | GNRU | DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2006 | AAUD | AMENDMENT OF ALLEGED USE DISAPPROVED | — |
| Mar 20, 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. |
| Mar 15, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |