USPTO serial 76232738
PUROGEN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAKAI, ADA HAN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - DOCKET CLERK
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 PUROGEN?
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.
Gerow D. Brill
GEROW D BRILL REVEO, INC85 EXECUTIVE BLVDELMSFORD, NY 10523UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Oxygen generation equipment comprising an oxygen generating apparatus based on electrochemical separation of oxygen from air; oxygen purification equipment comprising an oxygen purification apparatus based on electrochemical separation of oxygen from air; oxygen purification equipment comprising an oxygen purification apparatus based on electrochemical separation of oxygen from air and UV purification; oxygen purification equipment comprising an oxygen purification apparatus based on electrochemical separation of oxygen from air and infrared purification; oxygen purification equipment comprising an oxygen purification apparatus based on electrochemical separation of oxygen from air and ozone purification; oxygen purification equipment comprising an oxygen purification apparatus based on electrochemical separation of oxygen from air and particulate filtration | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 6, 2005 | UNDC | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - COURTESY COPY MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 26, 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. |
| Sep 26, 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. |
| Aug 11, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 5, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 4, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 4, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 22, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 2, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 2, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Oct 14, 2003 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 10, 2003 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 12, 2002 | 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. |
| Sep 10, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 3, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 1, 2002 | 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 1, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 17, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 22, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |