USPTO serial 77016755
SUR-FILL TECHNOLOGIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LOVELACE, JAMES B
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with SUR-FILL TECHNOLOGIES?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Harold V. Stotland
HAROLD V STOTLAND SEYFARTH SHAW LLP131 S DEARBORN ST STE 2400CHICAGO, IL 60603-5577UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Computer-operated, mechanized filling machines with valves for filling tanks with gas | ACTIVE | Apr 21, 1998 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2007 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Sep 26, 2007 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Feb 28, 2007 | CEAP | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 24, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 14, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Oct 13, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |