USPTO serial 77138150
CPFILMS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DIXON, JENNIFER HAZARD
- 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 CPFILMS?
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
St. Louis, MO
St. Louis, MO
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Chloe A. Hecht
Chloe A. Hecht LADAS & PARRY LLP224 S MICHIGAN AVE STE 1600CHICAGO, IL 60604-2508UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 017 | Tinted, non-tinted, reflective, non-reflective, laminated, and solar control plastic and polymer film for use in the windows of buildings, vehicles, boats, buses and trains; adhesive backed plastic film for use on exterior automotive surfaces for surface protection; adhesive backed plastic film for anti-graffiti protection; plastic film for application to glass and windows to provide intrusion resistance; adhesive backed plastic film with decorative patterns for application to building glass and windows; reflective plastic films for application to windows and glass featuring heat resistant and ultraviolet resistant properties; adhesive backed plastic film for application to building glass and glass in windows and doors for breakage resistance and safety protection | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Feb 22, 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. |
| Aug 20, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 20, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 22, 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. |
| Nov 21, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 21, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 21, 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. |
| Jun 13, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 6, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 12, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jan 22, 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. |
| Oct 30, 2007 | 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 10, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 25, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 25, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 23, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 3, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 3, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 3, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 14, 2007 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Jun 14, 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. |
| Jun 14, 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. |
| Jun 8, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 28, 2007 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |