Drawing for LEUCI

USPTO serial 79009133

LEUCI

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 402
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
RADEMACHER, MARK A
Law office
TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 LEUCI?

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.

JEFFREY H. KAUFMAN

JEFFREY H KAUFMAN OBLON SPIVAK MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT1940 DUKE STALEXANDRIA, VA 22314UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
011Lighting apparatus, namely, lighting fixturesSECTION 70 - CANCELLED—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Nov 14, 2012DETHDEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION—
May 11, 2012ADCHCHANGE OF NAME/ADDRESS REC'D FROM IB—
Oct 19, 2007FINTFINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB—
Sep 25, 2007FICSFINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB—
Sep 25, 2007FICRFINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB—
Sep 21, 2006MAB2ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPONDThe 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.
Sep 21, 2006ABN2ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSEThe 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.
Sep 15, 2006OPNXNOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB—
Aug 31, 2006OPNSNOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB—
Aug 31, 2006OPNRNOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB—
May 19, 2006CHANAPPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED—
Apr 17, 2006MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Feb 23, 2006CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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 23, 2006CNFRFINAL REFUSAL WRITTENA 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, 2006ACECAMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED—
Jan 23, 2006CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jan 23, 2006MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Aug 25, 2005RFNTREFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB—
Aug 1, 2005RFCSNON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB—
Jul 30, 2005RFCRNON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW—
Jul 29, 2005CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION WRITTENA 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 28, 2005DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Apr 4, 2005NWAPNEW APPLICATION ENTERED—
Mar 31, 2005SDRCSN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A SUBSEQ DESIG FROM IB—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance