USPTO serial 77099446
ELECTRONIC LAVAGE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HETZEL, DANNEAN
- 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 ELECTRONIC LAVAGE?
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.
STEPHEN F. ROTH
STEPHEN F. ROTH LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP600 SOUTH AVENUE WESTWESTFIELD, NJ 07090-1404UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS TO DIAGNOSE CANCERS AND OTHER CELL ABNORMALITIES IN THE HUMAN BODY | ACTIVE | — |
| 010 | DISPOSABLE NASAL ASPIRATORS; NASAL ASPIRATOR CUPS; MEDICAL SYRINGES; MEDICAL ELECTRODES; MEDICAL ELECTRODE ARRAYS; PATIENT MONITORING SENSORS; AND NONDISPOSABLE ELECTRICAL PROPERTY TISSUE ANALYZERS TO DIAGNOSE CANCERS AND OTHER CELL ABNORMALITIES IN THE BODY ALL FOR USE WITH MINIMALLY INVASIVE DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES | 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 DUCAC TECHNOLOGIES LLC
- Other trademarks owned by DUCAC TECHNOLOGIES LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 005
- Other trademarks in Class 010
- Similar marks named ELECTRONIC LAVAGE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Nov 29, 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 14, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2010 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 23, 2010 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 23, 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. |
| Jan 7, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 3, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 29, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Apr 14, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 23, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 23, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 5, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 17, 2007 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-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. |
| Dec 17, 2007 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-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. |
| Dec 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 29, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 29, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 24, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| May 24, 2007 | 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. |
| May 23, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 12, 2007 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Feb 12, 2007 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |