USPTO serial 76516700
WATERLOO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CAPSHAW, DANIEL
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with WATERLOO?
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.
Owner
Nam-gu, Kwangju, KR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Neil F. Greenblum
NEIL F GREENBLUM GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, PLC1950 ROLAND CLARKE PLRESTON, VA 20191UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Telescopes; tachometers; flowmeters for use in measuring the speed of river currents, and fluid currents in pipe, and discharge flowmeters for use in measuring the speed of river currents, and fluid currents in pipe; water level indicator; photogrammetric machines; coordinate measuring instrument used to determine length and longitudinal dimensions; swimming goggles; voltage surge protectors for telecommunication apparatus; computer programs for use in water supply system analysis and control | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 6, 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. |
| Sep 6, 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. |
| Dec 27, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 16, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 30, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 22, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 31, 2003 | 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. |
| Oct 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 19, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |