USPTO serial 85049112
MODULUX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BROWN, BARBARA TROFFKIN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 MODULUX?
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
Hsinchu County, TW
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Brent E. Routman
BRENT E. ROUTMAN MERCHANT & GOULD P.C.PO BOX 2910MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-0910UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | LED lighting module; lamp fixture assembly with LED lighting module, namely, flood lighting, high bay lighting, garden lighting, ceiling lighting, table lighting, desk lighting, floor lighting; LED lamp assembly for street light (lighting); LED assembly lighting for sports stadiums, arenas, and courts; LED assembly module for vehicle headlamp; wall lighting; landscape lighting; flexible lighting; under water lighting; flashlight; photoflash lighting; foggy lighting; mine lighting; flameproof lighting; emergency lighting | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 12, 2011 | 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. |
| Apr 12, 2011 | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2010 | 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 13, 2010 | 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 10, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 2, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 31, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |