USPTO serial 78169593
T TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- THOMAS, AMY E
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with T TEGA INDUSTRIES LTD?
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.
MARY A. MOY
LADAS & PARRY26 W 61 STNEW YORK, NY 10023-7604UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Rubber lined metal pipes for slurry transportation | ACTIVE | — |
| 007 | Conveyor belts; conveyor belt component parts, namely, pulley lagging systems, belt scrappers, conveyor belt skirting systems and triflo impact pads for loading points all sold as an integral component of conveyor belt systems; rubber and polyurethane screen decks used for primary, secondary, and tertiary screening solids and minerals used in the industries to separate solid from solid on the basis of size | ACTIVE | — |
| 017 | Rubber and rubber composite lining, namely, rubber metal, rubber ceramic, rubber poly urethane, rubber ultra high molecular weight polyethelyne, for autogenous mills, semi-autogenous mills, ball mills, rod mills, mixing drums, washery drums, log washers,debarking drums and tube mills for 1, 2 and 3 chambers, all for use in the mining, material handling, mineral processing and quarrying industries; rubber liners and rubber composite lining, namely,rubber metal, rubber ceramic, rubber poly urethane, rubber ultra high molecular weight polyethelyne for bunkers, hoppers, bins, chutes, pump parts and flotation cell parts; rubber slurry handling hoses; rubber lined non-metal pipes for slurry transportation | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2008 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Apr 2, 2008 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Sep 5, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 2, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 25, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 26, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 19, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 30, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 7, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 16, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 11, 2003 | 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. |
| Mar 24, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |