USPTO serial 78345638
BIO-GERM DEFENCE ANTI-BACTERIAL PROTECTIVE COATING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SWAIN, MICHELE LYNN
- 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 BIO-GERM DEFENCE ANTI-BACTERIAL PROTECTIVE COATING?
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.
James Michael Faier
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | Pre-finished hardwood flooring | 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 Satin Finish Hardwood Flooring Limited
- Other trademarks owned by Satin Finish Hardwood Flooring Limited
- Other trademarks in Class 019
- Similar marks named BIO-GERM DEFENCE ANTI-BACTERIAL PROTECTIVE COATING
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 5, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 5, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 3, 2009 | 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, 2008 | 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, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 31, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 27, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 15, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 15, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 14, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 10, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 9, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 21, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 21, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 21, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 18, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 3, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 3, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 1, 2006 | 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. |
| May 1, 2006 | 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 13, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 11, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 21, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 21, 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. |
| Jul 13, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 12, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 7, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |