USPTO serial 77257718
SCIMIST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ZAK, HENRY
- 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 SCIMIST?
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
Springfield, VA
Springfield, VA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
James C. Wray
JAMES C. WRAY JAMES C. WRAY1493 CHAIN BRIDGE RD STE 300MC LEAN, VA 22101-5726UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Mediated electrochemical oxidation systems and apparatus for destroying materials, including clothing and instruments, contaminated biological, organic and inorganic materials, clothing and instruments, and rendering contaminated equipment and waste materials free of biological, organic, inorganic and radioactive materials, composed of cabinets, housings, cases, electrolytic cells, chambers, reservoirs, pumps and membranes, sensors, coolers, heaters, temperature controllers and process controllers; apparatus for separating electrolytes into anolytes and catholytes with semi-permeable membranes and applying electric energy to the catholytes in the electrolytes, and exposing materials to mediated electrochemical strong oxidizing anolytes and enhancing the process with ultrasonic, ultraviolet and other energy applications to the anolyte and treated materials, and electrolytes and additives for use in the electrolytic cells, sold together as a unit therewith | 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 5, 2011 | 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 5, 2011 | 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, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2011 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| May 2, 2011 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Apr 29, 2011 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2011 | 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 9, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2010 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 5, 2010 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Nov 5, 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. |
| May 7, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2010 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| May 5, 2010 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 5, 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. |
| Nov 4, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 4, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 4, 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. |
| May 5, 2009 | 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 10, 2009 | 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 21, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 2, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 2, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 30, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 25, 2008 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION 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. |
| Jun 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 11, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 11, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 11, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 10, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 7, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Dec 6, 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 27, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 21, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |