USPTO serial 77462240
OCEAN TECHNOLOGY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PARK, JENNY K
- 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 OCEAN TECHNOLOGY?
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.
Stephen G. Janoski
STEPHEN G. JANOSKI ROYLANCE, ABRAMS, BERDO & GOODMAN, L.L.P.1300 19TH ST NW STE 600WASHINGTON, DC 20036-1649UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | SEAFOOD, FISH, SHELLFISH, CRUSTACEANS, LOBSTER, CRAB, NONE OF THE FOREGOING BEING LIVE; FISH FILLETS, CRAB MEAT; PREPARED SEAFOOD SUITABLE FOR USE AS APPETIZERS OR ENTREES; PACKAGE COMBINATIONS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP OR CRAB MEAT; PACKAGE COMBINATIONS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED VEGETABLES; PACKAGE COMBINATIONS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP OR CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED FRUITS; PACKAGED ENTREES CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP OR CRAB MEAT; PACKAGED ENTREES CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED VEGETABLES; PACKAGED ENTREES CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED FRUITS; PREPARED APPETIZERS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP OR CRAB MEAT; PREPARED APPETIZERS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED VEGETABLES; PREPARED APPETIZERS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED FRUITS; FROZEN ENTREES CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP OR CRAB MEAT; FROZEN ENTREES CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED VEGETABLES; FROZEN ENTREES CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED FRUITS; FROZEN APPETIZERS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP OR CRAB MEAT; FROZEN APPETIZERS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED VEGETABLES; FROZEN APPETIZERS CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF FISH, SEAFOOD, SHRIMP, CRAB MEAT, OR PROCESSED FRUITS; COOKED VEGETABLES; PROCESSED VEGETABLES; FROZEN VEGETABLES; VEGETABLE SALADS; COOKED FRUITS, PROCESSED FRUITS, FROZEN FRUITS; FRUIT SALADS; FRUIT PULPS; FRUIT PEELS; CUT FRESH VEGETABLES, PACKAGED MIXED VEGETABLES; CUT FRESH FRUITS; PACKAGED MIXED DRIED FRUITS; DIPS, EXCLUDING SAUCES AND SALSAS; PREPARED OR FROZEN SOUPS; VEGETABLE BASED SNACK FOODS; FISH BASED SNACK FOODS; SEAFOOD BASED SNACK FOODS | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | DISTRIBUTORSHIP SERVICES FEATURING SEAFOOD, FISH, SHELLFISH, CRUSTACEANS, CRAB AND CRABMEAT; RETAIL AND WHOLESALE STORE SERVICES FEATURING SEAFOOD, FISH, SHELLFISH, CRUSTACEANS, CRAB AND CRABMEAT | 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 Ocean Technology, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Ocean Technology, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Similar marks named OCEAN TECHNOLOGY
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 9, 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. |
| Aug 9, 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. |
| Jan 7, 2010 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 30, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 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. |
| Jul 29, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 29, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 6, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 6, 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. |
| Jan 6, 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. |
| Oct 14, 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. |
| Sep 24, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 4, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 22, 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. |
| Aug 14, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 5, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |