USPTO serial 78257741
MEMBRANE FILTER MEDIA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PARK, JENNY K
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - 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 MEMBRANE FILTER MEDIA?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Catherine Mennenga
Catherine Mennenga General Electric Company3135 Easton TurnpikeCorporate Trademark OperationFairfield, CT 06828-0001Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | water filtering units for commercial or industrial use, waste water purification units, water purifying units for potable water for commerical or industrial use and sewage treatment plants; water filtering units for commercial or industrial use, waste water purification units, water purifying units for potable water for commerical or industrial use and sewage treatment plants | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 12, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 16, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 13, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 13, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 28, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 24, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 24, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 15, 2005 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 15, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 3, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 9, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 19, 2004 | FAXX | FAX SENT | — |
| Nov 10, 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. |
| Oct 17, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |