USPTO serial 76272463
HYDRO-INDUSTRIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WELLS, CHRISTOPHER
- 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 HYDRO-INDUSTRIES?
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
23513 MIGDAL HAEMEK, IL
23513 MIGDAL HAEMEK, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
MARK M FRIEDMAN
MARK M FRIEDMAN BILL POLKINGHORN-DISCOVERY DISPATCHDR MARK FRIEDMAN LTD9003 FLORIN WAYUPPER MARLBORO, MD 20772Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | water-powered toys, and Water-powered Bath toys, namely rotating toy carousel, revolving toy helicopter with or without rifles, revolving toy airplane with or without guns, rotating toy crane with lever for raising and lowering objects, rotating toy robot with arm for lifting and moving objects, rotating toy shovel with fully operational arm for shoveling sand and small objects, rotating toy canon and rotating and moving toy pet animals; and water-powered toy buggies, toy boats, toy tractors and toy tanks all featuring a hydraulic lever that controls its speed direction and operation; and mechanical toys | 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 7, 2005 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Aug 4, 2005 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 9, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 18, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 13, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 5, 2004 | 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 31, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 26, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 18, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 4, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 5, 2003 | 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. |
| May 13, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 7, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 13, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Mar 25, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 23, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 4, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |