USPTO serial 78337840
RELERA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MARTIN, JENNIFER MCGARRY
- 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 RELERA?
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
SCHERING-PLOUGH ANIMAL HEALTH CORPORATION
SUMMIT, NJ
Other trademarks owned by SCHERING-PLOUGH ANIMAL HEALTH CORPORATION
SCHERING-PLOUGH VETERINARY CORPORATION
Summit, NJ
Other trademarks owned by SCHERING-PLOUGH VETERINARY CORPORATION
SCHERING-PLOUGH VETERINARY CORPORATION
Reno, NV
Other trademarks owned by SCHERING-PLOUGH VETERINARY CORPORATION
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Nancy L. Rowe
Nancy L. Rowe SCHERING-PLOUGH CORPORATION2000 GALLOPING HILL RDKENILWORTH, NJ 07033-1328UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Veterinary preparations for use in aquaculture, namely, a vaccine for the prevention of bacterial diseases. | 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 SCHERING-PLOUGH ANIMAL HEALTH CORPORATION
- Other trademarks owned by SCHERING-PLOUGH VETERINARY CORPORATION
- Other trademarks owned by SCHERING-PLOUGH VETERINARY CORPORATION
- Other trademarks in Class 005
- Similar marks named RELERA
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 16, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 16, 2008 | 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 16, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 14, 2007 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Dec 14, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 12, 2007 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | 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 28, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 11, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2007 | 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. |
| Aug 6, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 7, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 7, 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 16, 2006 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 5, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 12, 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. |
| Jan 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 10, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Apr 19, 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. |
| Mar 30, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 14, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 14, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 20, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 20, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 23, 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. |
| Jun 23, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 5, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |