USPTO serial 78073569
DURAFORM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CLAYTON, CHERYL A
- Law office
- PUBLICATION AND ISSUE 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 DURAFORM?
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
Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, PA
PITTSBURGH, PA
PITTSBURGH, PA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey M. Gitchel
JEFFREY M GITCHEL BAYER CORPORATE & BUSINESS SERVICES LLC100 BAYER RDPITTSBURGH, PA 15205-9707UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 017 | Polyurethane geotextile composite for lining canals, ditches, laterials, flumes and other irrigation or water-transporting structures | 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 Bayer Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by Bayer Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by BAYER MATERIALSCIENCE LLC
- Other trademarks owned by BAYER POLYMERS LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 017
- Similar marks named DURAFORM
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2006 | 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 1, 2005 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 1, 2005 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2005 | 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 3, 2005 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 16, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 16, 2003 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2003 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Aug 7, 2002 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 18, 2002 | 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. |
| May 29, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 27, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 2001 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Sep 6, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 4, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |