USPTO serial 74654951
(GES) GREASE ERADICATION SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STRZYZ, KAREN
- 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 (GES) GREASE ERADICATION SYSTEM?
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.
Mark I. Feldman
MARK I FELDMAN RUDNICK & WOLFE203 N LASALLE STCHICAGO, IL 60601UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | environmental maintenance and clean up services in the area of drains, drain fields, pumps, traps, lift stations and plumbing | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 5, 2001 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Sep 25, 2001 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 25, 2001 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 9, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 2, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 23, 1998 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 23, 1998 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 21, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 2, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 31, 1997 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 30, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 2, 1997 | 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. |
| Dec 31, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 22, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 1996 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 1996 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Feb 13, 1996 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 11, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 1995 | 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. |
| Sep 13, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 30, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |