USPTO serial 78230656
FLAME BLOCKER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRACEY, KAREN
- 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 FLAME BLOCKER?
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
Hoffman Estates, IL
Itasca, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michelle P. Ciotola
Michelle P. Ciotola Cantor Colburn LLP20 Church St.22nd Fl.Hartford, CT 06103Goods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2016 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Jul 27, 2016 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 16, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 15, 2007 | 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 15, 2007 | 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 3, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 17, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 17, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 3, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 2006 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | 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. |
| May 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 27, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 26, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 24, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 14, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Dec 3, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 10, 2004 | FAXX | FAX SENT | — |
| May 26, 2004 | 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. |
| Apr 12, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 12, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 9, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 14, 2003 | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |