USPTO serial 77607159
SAFPWR ESLIDER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MAHONEY, PAULA 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 SAFPWR ESLIDER?
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
Bartonville, TX
Bartonville, TX
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Ryan N. Carter
Ryan N. Carter Nyemaster GoodeP.O. Box 8870Cedar Rapids, IA 52408-8870UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | AN ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR AN ENERGY SOURCE, SUCH AS A BATTERY, COMPOSED OF ELECTRONIC CONTROL CIRCUITS FOR ENERGY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, SAFETY SENSORS MANAGEMENT, DEVICE DEMAND INTERFACE MANAGEMENT AND DATA LOGGING, SAFETY SENSORS, A SHOCK MANAGEMENT INTERLAYER, AND FIRMWARE AND SOFTWARE, THE SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO MAXIMIZE THE ENERGY OUTPUT FROM THE ENERGY SOURCE, INCREASE THE SAFETY OF THE ENERGY SOURCE AND THE DEVICE IT IS SERVING, AND LOG REAL TIME AND HISTORICAL DATA TO ENABLE THE SYSTEM TO ADAPT TO ITS INTERNAL NEEDS AS WELL AS THE NEEDS OF THE DEVICE THAT THE ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IS SERVING | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 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. |
| Jan 11, 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 5, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 9, 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 17, 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 25, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 9, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 4, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 19, 2009 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 8, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |