USPTO serial 78873486
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Dusan Clark
DUSAN CLARK SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP717 N HARWOOD ST STE 3400DALLAS, TX 75201-6534UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 017 | precision rubber parts; precision plastic parts; rubber molding; plastic molding; plastic and rubber extrusion; plastic and rubber assemblies; polymer of semi-finished or pre-shaped forms for use in the manufacture of medical, industrial products and accessories | ACTIVE | Oct 1, 2005 |
| 040 | custom manufacturing of medical, industrial products and accessories for others, namely, precision rubber parts, precision plastic parts, rubber molding, plastic molding, plastic and rubber extrusion, plastic and rubber assemblies, polymer of semi-finished or pre-shaped forms | ACTIVE | Oct 1, 2005 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 2008 | 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 10, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 13, 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. |
| Nov 12, 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. |
| Apr 30, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 30, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 30, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 30, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 2, 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. |
| Sep 30, 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. |
| Sep 30, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 6, 2006 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |