USPTO serial 78751851
CLOVER INDUSTRIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAPP, HEATHER
- Law office
- TTAB
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 CLOVER INDUSTRIES?
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.
Robert V. Petershack
Judith L. Grubner MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP180 NORTH STETSON AVENUESUITE 2000CHICAGO, IL 60601-6710Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Machine parts, namely, hydraulic and pneumatic cylinders | ABANDONED | Nov 2, 2005 |
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 2, 2008 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| May 2, 2008 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| May 2, 2008 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 7, 2008 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jun 27, 2007 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 27, 2007 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Feb 7, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 6, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 4, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 4, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 4, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 20, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 20, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 20, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| May 25, 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. |
| May 25, 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. |
| May 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |