USPTO serial 78362578
DURA TUFF
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KHAN, ASMAT A
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - MANAGING ATTORNEY
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 DURA TUFF?
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
Brampton, Ontrario L6W 3G5, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Midge M. Hyman
MIDGE M HYMAN COWAN, LIEBOWITZ & LATMAN PC1133 AVE OF THE AMERICASNEW YORK, NY 10036-6799UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 017 | POLYURETHANE FILM FOR USE AS A MOISURE BARRIER THAT COVERS GREENHOUSES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 24, 2005 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| May 24, 2005 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2005 | LOAP | LETTER OF ABANDONMENT PROCESSED | — |
| May 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 18, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 1, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 1, 2004 | CNRT | SU - NON-FINAL ACTION - WRITTEN | 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. |
| Aug 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 13, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |