Drawing for TOMO-E

USPTO serial 79011746

TOMO-E

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 402
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
PRATER, JILL I
Law office
LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 TOMO-E?

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.

Robert P. Michal

ROBERT P MICHAL FRISHAUF, HOLTZ, GOODMAN & CHICK PC220 FIFTH AVENEW YORK, NY 10001-7708UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
007Centrifugal separators; filter machines for chemical processing; filter presses; disintegrators for chemical processing; waste crushing machines; and screw conveyorsSECTION 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
Oct 3, 2015DENANOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED—
Oct 2, 2015DETHDEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION—
Feb 8, 2008FINTFINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB—
Jan 15, 2008FICSFINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB—
Jan 15, 2008FICRFINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB—
Jun 28, 2007ADCHCHANGE OF NAME/ADDRESS REC'D FROM IB—
Jan 12, 2007MAB2ABANDONMENT 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.
Jan 12, 2007ABN2ABANDONMENT - 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.
Dec 28, 2006OPNXNOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB—
Dec 14, 2006OPNSNOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB—
Dec 14, 2006OPNRNOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB—
Jun 16, 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.
Jun 5, 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.
Apr 28, 2006ACECAMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED—
Mar 28, 2006CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Mar 28, 2006FAXXFAX RECEIVED—
Oct 21, 2005RFNTREFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB—
Oct 6, 2005RFCSNON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB—
Oct 5, 2005RFCRNON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW—
Oct 4, 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.
Sep 29, 2005DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jul 15, 2005NWAPNEW APPLICATION ENTERED—
Jul 14, 2005REPRSN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance