USPTO serial 78764082
LIFTAEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- POWERS, ALEXANDER L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 LIFTAEM?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
DAVID H. JAFFER
DAVID H JAFFER PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLPPO BOX 10500MCLEAN, VA 22102-8500UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Body transfer system, consisting primarily of an inflatable air mattress for medical purposes, namely, for moving a patient or body from one supporting surface to another supporting surface | ACTIVE | Jul 6, 2006 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 4, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 31, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 31, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 10, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 11, 2006 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Sep 11, 2006 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 1, 2006 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2006 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 3, 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. |
| Jun 3, 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. |
| Jun 2, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 7, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |