USPTO serial 75428098
THE DIFFERENCE IS CLEAN AND CLEAR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OH, WON TEAK
- 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 THE DIFFERENCE IS CLEAN AND CLEAR?
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.
Roberto Ledesma
Lawrence W. Greene Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, P.C.1133 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | vacuum cleaners | ACTIVE | — |
| 011 | air conditioners, household air cleaners, commercial air cleaners, industrial air cleaners, air purifying units for commercial use, air purifying units for domestic use, air purifying units for industrial use, water filtering units for domestic use | 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 EURO-PRO OPERATING LLC
- Other trademarks owned by FANTOM TECHNOLOGIES INC.
- Other trademarks owned by EURO-PRO OPERATING LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 007
- Other trademarks in Class 011
- Similar marks named THE DIFFERENCE IS CLEAN AND CLEAR
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 2023 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 21, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 21, 2011 | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Jul 13, 2010 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 12, 2010 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2010 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 5, 2010 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 29, 2009 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Dec 29, 2009 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 19, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Aug 19, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 18, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 18, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 18, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 18, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 7, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 24, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 24, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 5, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Sep 5, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Sep 4, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | 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 16, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 6, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Sep 5, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 12, 2006 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Feb 10, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 31, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 31, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Aug 1, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 11, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 6, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 25, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 5, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 30, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 6, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 4, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 20, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 7, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 13, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 7, 1999 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 5, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 6, 1998 | 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. |
| Nov 5, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 26, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |