USPTO serial 77246168
BASIONIC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- JOINER, KATINA JACKSON
- 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 BASIONIC?
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
Ludwigshafen am Rhein, DE
Ludwigshafen am Rhein, DE
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Elizabeth Pasquine
ELIZABETH PASQUINE NOVAK DRUCE + QUIGG LLP1300 I STREET, NW1000 WEST TOWERWASHINGTON, DC 20005Goods and services
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 BASF Aktiengesellschaft
- Other trademarks owned by BASF Aktiengesellschaft
- Other trademarks in Class 001
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named BASIONIC
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 21, 2009 | 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 21, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Sep 30, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Sep 17, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Sep 9, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| May 7, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 7, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 7, 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 18, 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. |
| Aug 26, 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. |
| Aug 6, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 20, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 30, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 30, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 12, 2008 | 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 12, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 12, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 18, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 18, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 24, 2007 | CEPE | COMBINED EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | CEAP | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 19, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 7, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |