USPTO serial 73665218
ENVIROSEAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WELLS, KELLEY L
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 ENVIROSEAL?
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
GAINESVILLE, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
EDWARD A. HEDMAN
EDWARD A HEDMAN ESQ HEDMAN, GIBSON, COSTIGAN & HOARE, PC1185 AVE OF THE AMERICASNEW YORK, NY 10036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 002 | MASONRY WATER REPELLANT COMPOSITIONS | ABANDONED | May 6, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 27, 1991 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 30, 1990 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 30, 1990 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Dec 22, 1989 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 1989 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 3, 1989 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 19, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 12, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 21, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 1988 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A 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. |
| Nov 2, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 31, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 1988 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 3, 1987 | 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. |
| Aug 28, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |