USPTO serial 79010395
VIEWSE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SCHRODY, ALLISON PAIGE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 VIEWSE?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Optical lenses; theft prevention installations, electric; anti-theft warning apparatus; monitors for closed-circuit television surveillance | SECTION 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
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 28, 2015 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2015 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Jun 7, 2013 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 21, 2006 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Sep 5, 2006 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Sep 5, 2006 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 12, 2005 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 19, 2005 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | 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 18, 2005 | RFWR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) WITHDRAWN FOR REVIEW | — |
| Jun 8, 2005 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Jun 7, 2005 | 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. |
| May 27, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 27, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| May 26, 2005 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |