USPTO serial 75934784
PRECISION VASCULAR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARRUTHERS, SUE
- 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 PRECISION VASCULAR?
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
PRECISION VASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
PRECISION VASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
Precision Vascular Systems, Inc.
Salt Lake City, UT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Wayne A. Sivertson
Wayne A. Sivertson NAWROCKI ROONEY SIVERTSON PA3433 BROADWAY ST NESuite 401 Broadway Place EastMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413-1740Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Medical Catheters, Medical Cuidewires and Stents | 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 PRECISION VASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by PRECISION VASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by Precision Vascular Systems, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 010
- Similar marks named PRECISION VASCULAR
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 6, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 15, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 11, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 2, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Jun 9, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 4, 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. |
| Jan 11, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | 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 29, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 22, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 29, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Oct 4, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| Mar 14, 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. |
| Feb 22, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 2, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 10, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 6, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 15, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 13, 2005 | 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. |
| May 12, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 16, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 2, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 24, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 11, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 24, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 24, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 26, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 16, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 2000 | 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. |
| Aug 15, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 14, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 8, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |