USPTO serial 78764486
RADIANCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MUNSON OTT, MARY DEIRDRE
- 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 RADIANCE?
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.
C. David Emhardt
C DAVID EMHARDT WOODARD, EMHARDT, MORIARTY MCNETT & HENR111 MONUMENT CIR STE 3700INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46204-5107UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Medical devices, namely, ureteral stents | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 1, 2008 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Aug 1, 2008 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jan 4, 2008 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2008 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 11, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 11, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 30, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 22, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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 22, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 20, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 1, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 21, 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 17, 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. |
| Jan 18, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 7, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |