USPTO serial 78797755
PBF
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BESCH, JAY C
- 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 PBF?
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.
Ralph E. Locher
RALPH E LOCHER LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLPPO BOX 2480HOLLYWOOD, FL 33022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Bulk base metals and alloys for further manufacturing, namely casting alloys, light metals, aluminum alloys, steel, copper alloys, copper-zinc-aluminum alloys, copper-tin-zinc alloys, copper-nickel-tin alloys, copper-tin alloys, copper-zinc alloys, copper-nickel-zinc alloys,copper-nickel-zinc-lead alloys, copper-nickel-silicon alloys, copper-iron alloys, bronzes, nickel-silvers, leaded-nickel-silvers, brasses, high-tensile brasses, and dezincification-resistant brasses | 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 28, 2007 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Aug 28, 2007 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Aug 7, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 6, 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. |
| Feb 6, 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 16, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 16, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 20, 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. |
| Jul 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. |
| Jul 14, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 30, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |