USPTO serial 75766188
SUREGRIP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RICHARDS, LESLIE
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 SUREGRIP?
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.
Ariana G. Voigt
ARIANA G VOIGT MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP100 E WISCONSIN AVE STE 3300MILWAUKEE, WI 53202-4108UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 016 | paper staplers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| May 11, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 2, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 10, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 6, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Aug 21, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 23, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 22, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 30, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 15, 2001 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 9, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 1999 | 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 29, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |