USPTO serial 76561248
RE-INVENTING THE SEAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SNAPP, TINA LOUISE
- 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 RE-INVENTING THE SEAL?
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 G. Crilly, Esquire
Michael G. Crilly, Esquire Law Offices of Michael Crilly104 South York RoadHatboro, PA 19040UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Providing online retail store services featuring seals and sealing assemblies used in turbo machinery for limiting and controlling fluid transport between and among regions of differing pressure and by providing commercial exhibition and trade show services featuring such seals and sealing assemblies used in turbomachinery | ACTIVE | — |
| 037 | Repair and maintenance of seals for limiting fluid leakage in turbomachinery | 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 Stein Seal Company
- Other trademarks owned by Stein Seal Company
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 037
- Similar marks named RE-INVENTING THE SEAL
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2, 2009 | 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 2, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 28, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 28, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 6, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 6, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 26, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 1, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 29, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 5, 2007 | PGEX | PETITION GRANTED - EXTENSION REQUEST FILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 30, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2007 | 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 7, 2006 | 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 18, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 8, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 30, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 29, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 9, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 16, 2005 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Nov 15, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 8, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 18, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 18, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Oct 5, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 5, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 1, 2005 | 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 1, 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. |
| Mar 10, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 12, 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. |
| Jun 4, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 16, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |