USPTO serial 85102267
SELENEST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHELI, ANGELA M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 SELENEST?
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
Okayama Prefecture, JP
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 & NEUSTADT, L.L.P1940 DUKE STALEXANDRIA, VA 22314-3451UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Plates, dishes, sliders or chips having multi-well arrays that can be used in chemical analysis, biological analysis or patterning for scientific, laboratory or medical research use; Bioreactor for cell culturing; Laboratory apparatus and instrument for cell culturing | ACTIVE | — |
| 010 | Surgical, medical, dental and veterinary apparatus and instruments for cell culturing | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 4, 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. |
| May 4, 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. |
| Oct 4, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Oct 4, 2010 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Oct 4, 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 26, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 11, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 10, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |