Home ›
Trademark Categories ›
Electronics & Software ›
2008 ›
NE ›
NEOLCD
Trademark search for:
NEOLCD
No active United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) registrations found, based on publicly available USPTO trademark records.
Trademark records may change over time.
For the most up-to-date trademark status, domain availability,
and social handle checks, run a live search.
Check latest trademark, domains & social handles
Live search · Most up-to-date results
USPTO Filing History
Key events recorded for this trademark application
2008-12-31 — Application filed
2009-01-05 — Application filed
2009-01-06 — Notice of pseudo mark mailed
2009-03-19 — Assigned to examiner
2009-03-20 — Approved for pub - principal register
2009-03-21 — Assigned to lie
2009-03-21 — Law office publication review completed
2009-04-08 — Notice of publication
2009-04-28 — Published for opposition
2009-07-21 — Noa mailed - sou required from applicant
2010-01-19 — Sou teas extension received
2010-01-19 — Sou extension 1 filed
2010-01-19 — Sou extension 1 granted
2010-07-16 — Sou teas extension received
2010-07-16 — Sou extension 2 filed
2010-08-16 — Case assigned to intent to use paralegal
2010-08-16 — Sou extension 2 granted
2010-08-17 — Notice of approval of extension request e-mailed
2011-01-06 — Sou teas extension received
2011-01-06 — Sou extension 3 filed
2011-01-11 — Sou extension 3 granted
2011-01-12 — Notice of approval of extension request e-mailed
2011-07-12 — Sou teas extension received
2011-07-12 — Sou extension 4 filed
2011-07-15 — Sou extension 4 granted
2011-07-16 — Notice of approval of extension request e-mailed
2012-02-20 — Application abandoned
2012-02-20 — Final status recorded
2012-02-21 — Application abandoned
Owner Information
Panasonic Corporation
Osaka JP
Panasonic Corporation
Osaka JP
Correspondent
GREGORY A. STOBBS HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C. 5445 CORPORATE DR STE 200 TROY, MI 48098-2683 UNITED STATES
Filing Details
Filing Date:
2008-12-31
Status Date:
2012-02-20
Disclaimer: This page is informational only and does not constitute legal advice.
Trademark availability depends on jurisdiction, usage, and legal interpretation.