USPTO serial 76603260
SEASCAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STINE, DAVID
- 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 SEASCAN?
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.
Anne M. Sterba
ANNE M STERBA ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK PC1425 K ST NW STE 800WASHINGTON, DC 20005-3673UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | PORTABLE DECONTAMINATION STERILIZATION MODULAR SYSTEM VIA A WATER-BORNE PLATFORM VESSEL USING AN IONIZING RADIATION SOURCE COMPRISING OF A LINEAR ACCELERATOR SYSTEM, X-RAY CONVERTER, CONVEYOR SYSTEM, CONTROL SYSTEMS, POWER CONDITIONING SYSTEM, OPTIONAL POWER GENERATION SYSTEM, INTRINSIC RADIATION SHIELDING, FIELD-EXPEDIENT RADIATION SHIELDING AND PRIMARY RADIATION SHIELDING | 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 L-3 COMMUNICATIONS TITAN CORPORATION
- Other trademarks owned by The Titan Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by The Titan Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 011
- Similar marks named SEASCAN
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 29, 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. |
| Mar 29, 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. |
| Jul 10, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 10, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 10, 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. |
| Jun 14, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jan 10, 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. |
| Oct 18, 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. |
| Sep 28, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 21, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 21, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 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. |
| May 9, 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. |
| May 3, 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 18, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 8, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Sep 8, 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. |
| Sep 7, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 2, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 16, 2004 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 29, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |