USPTO serial 77423669
POWERTRAK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHELI, ANGELA M
- 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 POWERTRAK?
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.
Mark I. Peroff, Esq.
Mark I. Peroff, Esq. Hiscock & Barclay, LLPSeven Times SquareNew York, NY 10036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Industrial metal hoses and industrial metal flexible hoses; metal pipes and metal flexible pipes; metal tubing and metal flexible tubing; metal hose, pipe and tube fittings; metal hose, pipe and tube, couplings; metal hose, pipe and tube connectors | ACTIVE | — |
| 017 | Non-metal hoses for plumbing; non-metal pipes and tubing; non-metal flexible hoses for plumbing; non-metal flexible pipes and tubing; rubber hoses for industrial applications; rubber tubing and pipes; non-metal fittings, couplings and connectors for plumbing hoses, pipes and tubing | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by DUNLOP HIFLEX UK LIMITED
- Other trademarks owned by DUNLOP HIFLEX UK LIMITED
- Other trademarks in Class 006
- Other trademarks in Class 017
- Similar marks named POWERTRAK
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 27, 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 27, 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. |
| Jun 5, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2010 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| May 18, 2010 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 18, 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. |
| Oct 30, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 30, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 30, 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 26, 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. |
| Mar 3, 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. |
| Feb 11, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 27, 2009 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 23, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 12, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 3, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 3, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 16, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 27, 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. |
| Jun 27, 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. |
| Jun 27, 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. |
| Jun 23, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 21, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |