USPTO serial 75938028
MULTI WAVE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MANDIR, FREDERICK
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE UNIT
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 MULTI WAVE?
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
3401 Burgdorf, CH
3401 Burgdorf, CH
D-68305 MANNHEIM, DE
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CHRISTINA M SZITTA
LEON MEDZHIBOVSKY FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI, LLP666 5TH AVENEW YORK, NY 10103UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Medical devices, namely, drug delivery systems | 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 Disetronic Licensing AC
- Other trademarks owned by Disetronic Licensing AG
- Other trademarks owned by ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GMBH
- Other trademarks in Class 010
- Similar marks named MULTI WAVE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2005 | 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. |
| May 14, 2004 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| May 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 3, 2004 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 3, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 22, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 15, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 5, 2003 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 5, 2003 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 7, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 5, 2002 | 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. |
| Aug 13, 2002 | 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. |
| Aug 13, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 24, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 28, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 11, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 11, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 7, 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. |
| May 10, 2001 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Feb 28, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 28, 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 10, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |