USPTO serial 77390795
ECOFIX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILLIS, PAMELA Y
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with ECOFIX?
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
See Addnl. Stmt., CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
George A. Pelletier, Jr.
GEORGE A. PELLETIER, JR. CANTOR COLBURN LLP20 CHURCH ST FL 22HARTFORD, CT 06103-3290UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | onsite or decentralized wastewater treatment systems comprised of plates that include channels and orifices to distribute the effluent evenly on top of a filtering media in order to encourage the aerobical treatment of the wastewater, all for residential, commercial or communal applications | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 17, 2014 | 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. |
| Nov 15, 2014 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 9, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 20, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 20, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 13, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 13, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 8, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 4, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 3, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 1, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 18, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 2, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 13, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 31, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 22, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 8, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 17, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 27, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 16, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 8, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 8, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 6, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 5, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 5, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 3, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 3, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 20, 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. |
| May 20, 2008 | 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. |
| May 20, 2008 | 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. |
| May 20, 2008 | 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. |
| May 19, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 12, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |