Drawing for CASCADE COMPACT SIEVE

USPTO serial 75176129

CASCADE COMPACT SIEVE

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 601
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
BAXLEY,ANDREW P
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 CASCADE COMPACT SIEVE?

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.

BARTH X DEROSA

BARTH X DEROSA WATSON COLE STEVENS DAVIS PLLC1400 K ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20005-2477UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
007machines for sieving, grading, straining and screening for use in the food pharmaceutical, chemical, coating, waste recovery, adhesive, ceramics, metal, dairy produce and fertilizer industriesABANDONED—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Feb 3, 1999ABN1ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED—
Feb 2, 1999JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Jan 29, 1999EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Jan 29, 1999EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Sep 16, 1998CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
Aug 18, 1998JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
May 13, 1998CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
May 12, 1998DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
May 12, 1998JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
May 8, 1998EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Oct 15, 1997CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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.
Oct 14, 1997CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Apr 1, 1997CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 1, 1997DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance