USPTO serial 74343677
RECYCLING RESOURCES, INC. RECYCLING WASTE INTO PROFITS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHOS, LESLIE BISHOP
- 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 RECYCLING RESOURCES, INC. RECYCLING WASTE INTO PROFITS?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
William A. Rudy
WILLIAM A RUDY HOVEY, WILLIAMS, TIMMONS & COLLINS1400 MERCANTILE BANK TWR1101 WALNUT STKANSAS CITY, MO 64106Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | reconstructing and rebuilding commercial, individual and personal equipment | ABANDONED | — |
| 040 | recycling of commercial, individual and personal equipment | ABANDONED | — |
| 042 | distributorship in the field of commercial, individual and personal equipment and redesign services in the field of commercial, individual and personal equipment | ABANDONED | — |
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.
- Other trademarks owned by Recycling Resources, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Recycling Resources, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 037
- Other trademarks in Class 040
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named RECYCLING RESOURCES, INC. RECYCLING WASTE INTO PROFITS
- Prosecution event ABN6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 1996 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 5, 1996 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 1996 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 5, 1995 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Sep 12, 1995 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Aug 11, 1995 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 17, 1995 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 17, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 14, 1994 | 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. |
| Oct 13, 1994 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 12, 1994 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Jul 19, 1994 | PILM | PETITION INQUIRY LETTER ISSUED | — |
| Feb 28, 1994 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 27, 1993 | 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. |
| May 11, 1993 | 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. |
| Mar 11, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |