USPTO serial 78133078
NTEGRITY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DE JONGE, KATHLEEN
- 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 NTEGRITY?
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
San Luis Obispo, CA
San Luis Obispo, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Susan L Crockett
SUSAN L CROCKETT CROCKETT & CROCKETT24012 CALLE DE LA PLATASTE 400LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Semiconductor wafer processing machines, namely chemical mechanical planarizers, silicon wafer carriers, silicon wafer loaders, silicon wafer endpoint detectors, silicon wafer grinders, silicon wafer polishers and replacement parts therefor; photonics, optical and telecommunication component processing machines, namely chemical mechanical planarizers, silicon wafer carriers, silicon wafer loaders, silicon wafer endpoint detectors, silicon wafer grinders, silicon wafer polishers and replacement parts therefor; all for the research, failure analysis, processing and production of semiconductor substrates, thin films, silicon discs, silicon wafers, optical components, photonics components and telecommunication components | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 2005 | 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, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 2, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 2, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 2, 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. |
| Mar 2, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 9, 2003 | 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. |
| Nov 19, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 3, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 19, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 13, 2003 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Aug 12, 2003 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jun 25, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 26, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 10, 2002 | 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 23, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |