USPTO serial 76698173
SUREFLAP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KING, CHRISTINA B
- 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 SUREFLAP?
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
Cambridgeshire CB4 8QP, GB
Cambridgeshire CB4 8QP, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jordan S. Weinstein
JORDAN S. WEINSTEIN OBLON, SPIVAK, McCLELLAND, MAIER1940 DUKE STALEXANDRIA, VA 22314-3451UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Door fittings made of non-precious metals; metal pet doors; metal locks; metal pet doors with locks; metal parts and fittings for all the aforesaid goods, namely, frames, swing flaps, latches, mounting adaptors for installation purposes and tunnel extenders | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | Computer chips; microchips; electronic tagging, namely, encoded micro particulates, tags and taggants of plastic, metal or silicate for use in the field of passive labeling, tracing or tracking of animals; remote control transmitters for electronic doors; computer software, namely, software for integrating location signal data for identification devices located on animals and maps, software for registering, monitoring, and locating animals having identification devices; identification systems for identifying animals, namely, electronic tags with unique identification code, which tags are implanted in animals and can be detected by an electronic reading device to identify the animal and its owner | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 30, 2012 | 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. |
| Jan 30, 2012 | 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 6, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2011 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 5, 2011 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 5, 2011 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 30, 2011 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jun 28, 2011 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2011 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 28, 2011 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 28, 2010 | 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 2, 2010 | 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 13, 2010 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 27, 2010 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 26, 2010 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 24, 2010 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 24, 2010 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 24, 2010 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 1, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 30, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 30, 2010 | 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 3, 2010 | 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. |
| Apr 30, 2010 | 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 23, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | 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 28, 2009 | 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 28, 2009 | 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 25, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 4, 2009 | FFDM | FILING RECEIPT CORRECTION ENTERED | — |
| Aug 3, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 31, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 10, 2009 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |