USPTO serial 77675339
MILIBASTIONS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HARDY LUDLOW, TARAH KIM
- 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 MILIBASTIONS?
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.
Steven J. Wadyka, Jr.
STEVEN J. WADYKA, JR. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP2101 L ST NW STE 1000WASHINGTON, DC 20037-1526UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Portable metal buildings; Portable metal free-standing barriers; multi-purpose metal barriers for use in commercial, industrial, institutional, military, and security settings; metal gabions | ACTIVE | — |
| 019 | Portable non-metal buildings; portable non-metal free-standing barriers; multi-purpose non-metal barriers for use in commercial, industrial, institutional, military, and security settings; non-metal gabions | 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 ACS Holdings USA, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by ACS Holdings USA, LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 006
- Other trademarks in Class 019
- Similar marks named MILIBASTIONS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 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. |
| May 9, 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. |
| Oct 8, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 6, 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. |
| Apr 6, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 12, 2010 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 12, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 9, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 27, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| May 16, 2009 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-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. |
| May 16, 2009 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-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. |
| May 16, 2009 | 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. |
| May 13, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 26, 2009 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Feb 25, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Feb 25, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |