USPTO serial 77212294
NANOMEC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BENJAMIN, SARA NICOLE
- 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 NANOMEC?
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
Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, MN
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Wayne A. Sivertson
WAYNE A. SIVERTSON NAWROCKI, ROONEY & SIVERTSON, P.A.3433 BROADWAY ST NE STE 401MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413-3009UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Nanomechanical Testing Instruments Comprising of Probe, Transducer, Controller and Operating Computer Software and Operating Computer Firmware | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 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 6, 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 4, 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. |
| Feb 9, 2010 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 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. |
| Jan 4, 2010 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 4, 2010 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 15, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 14, 2009 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 25, 2009 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jun 25, 2009 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jun 25, 2009 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jun 3, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 20, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 20, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 5, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 2, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 2, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 24, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 26, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |