USPTO serial 76533712
SIT SECURE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BENMAMAN, ALICE
- 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 SIT SECURE?
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
Pinellas Park, FL
Pinellas Park, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Arthur W. Fisher, III
ARTHUR W FISHER III A. W. FISHER, III PA5553 W WATERS AVE STE 316TAMPA, FL 33634UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Disposable toilet seat wipes impregnated with chemicals or compounds for surface disinfection | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 19, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 19, 2007 | 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 7, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 15, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 26, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 20, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 9, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 1, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 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. |
| Mar 18, 2005 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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 18, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 20, 2004 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Feb 18, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |