USPTO serial 76693306
AEROCAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BEN, LINDSEY HEATHER
- 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 AEROCAM?
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
Dallas, TX
DALLAS, TX
DALLAS, TX
DALLAS, TX
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kay Lyn Schwartz
KAY LYN SCHWARTZ GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP1601 ELM ST STE 3000IP SECTIONDALLAS, TX 75201-4761Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Machines and devices for producing energy, namely, wind turbines, generators for wind turbines, and engines for wind energy generation, conversion and distribution, and the structural equipment, structural parts and structural accessories therefor | 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 X Blade Systems LP
- Other trademarks owned by BROADSTAR DEVELOPMENTS LP
- Other trademarks owned by BROADSTAR DEVELOPMENTS LP
- Other trademarks owned by BROADSTAR DEVELOPMENTS LP
- Other trademarks in Class 007
- Similar marks named AEROCAM
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 13, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2010 | 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. |
| May 28, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| May 27, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 27, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| May 10, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 10, 2010 | 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. |
| Nov 10, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 29, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 13, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 1, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | 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 11, 2009 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 30, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 30, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 14, 2008 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |