USPTO serial 74691952
R13
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ABRAMS, JACQUELINE WILLETTE
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 R13?
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
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CA
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CA
Islington, Ontario, M9B 1R1, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
BEN D. TOBOR
BEN D TOBOR BRACEWELL & PATTERSON, LLPP O BOX 61389HOUSTON, TX 77208-1389UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | engineering consulting services for the design, procurement, construction, installation, and operation of plants and equipment for the production of chlorine dioxide, and engineering consulting services concerning plant and equipment for the production of chlorine dioxide | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by SUPERIOR PLUS INC.
- Other trademarks owned by SUPERIOR PLUS INC.
- Other trademarks owned by Sterling Pulp Chemicals, Ltd.
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named R13
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2007 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Jun 20, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 17, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Apr 18, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 4, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 17, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 6, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 3, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 3, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 5, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 17, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 17, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 12, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 24, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 21, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 21, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 9, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 9, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 17, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 6, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 10, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 15, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 17, 1998 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 16, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 19, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 13, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 12, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 14, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 25, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 5, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 1, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 24, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |