USPTO serial 76571310
CSM CUSTOMER SATISFACTION MEMBRANES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ANKRAH, NAAKWAMA S
- 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 CSM CUSTOMER SATISFACTION MEMBRANES?
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
Kyungsangbuk-do, KR
Kyungsangbuk-do, KR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Charles M. Marmelstein
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Water purifiers; filters for water purifiers; air purifying apparatus, namely, air purifying units for industrial use; hydrogen purification membranes, strainers for water lines; water desalination plants; purification installations for sewage | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 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. |
| May 31, 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. |
| Nov 20, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 28, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 28, 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. |
| Jan 3, 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. |
| Dec 14, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 15, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 1, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 10, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 9, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 1, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 1, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 25, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 25, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 22, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Mar 22, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Mar 1, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 13, 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. |
| Aug 12, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 6, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |