USPTO serial 76409218
PROLOCK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KEARNEY, COLLEEN
- 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 PROLOCK?
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.
Michael A. Lisi
MICHAEL A LISI HONIGMAN MILLER SCHWARTZ & COHN LLP38500 WOODWARD AVE STE 100BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48304-0908UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | Separable or inseparable plastic interference fit fasteners other than machine parts in the nature of an interlocking device connecting one plastic part with another plastic part for use in varying industrial applications which use plastics, polypropylene, nylon, ABS and TPO elastomers, namely applications in the automotive field, clothing industry, commercial signage and furniture industries | 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 Gershenson Family Patent Limited Partnership
- Other trademarks owned by Gershenson Family Patent Limited Partnership
- Other trademarks in Class 020
- Similar marks named PROLOCK
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 15, 2008 | 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 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 30, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 9, 2007 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 29, 2006 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 6, 2006 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 1, 2005 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 15, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Dec 23, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Dec 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 29, 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. |
| Apr 6, 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. |
| Mar 17, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 27, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 1, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 1, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 23, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 8, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 26, 2002 | 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 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 10, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |