USPTO serial 85621605
CROKER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CORWIN, KEVIN SCOTT
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 CROKER?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
James W. Badie
JAMES W. BADIE LAW OFFICES OF JAMES W. BADIE521 5TH AVE RM 3300NEW YORK, NY 10175-3399UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Fire extinguishers, fire extinguisher cabinets, fire extinguisher theft alarms, fire hoses, fire hose nozzles, fire hose cabinets, fire valves, fire valve cabinets, fire sprinklers, sprinkler heads for fire sprinklers, sprinkler control cabinets, fire alarm control panels, security access panels, alarm bells, flow meters, access panels, fire rated cabinets, fire blankets, fire axes and fire fighter equipment, namely, pumps | ACTIVE | May 23, 1987 |
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 1, 2013 | 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 1, 2013 | 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 19, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 31, 2012 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2012 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2012 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 17, 2012 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2012 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 14, 2012 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |