USPTO serial 77253986
TUBE LINE STAINLESS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SINGH, TEJBIR
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 TUBE LINE STAINLESS?
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.
John D. Keller
JOHN D. KELLER JOHN D. KELLER AND ASSOCIATES, LTD125 S BLOOMINGDALE RDBLOOMINGDALE, IL 60108-2952UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | "Stainless steel and alloy pipe fittings and flanges" in International class 6 | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 2000 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Oct 1, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 16, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Nov 26, 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. |
| Nov 26, 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. |
| Nov 26, 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. |
| Nov 19, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 16, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |