USPTO serial 78379253
ELECTROSTAT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GASKINS, TONJA M
- 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 ELECTROSTAT?
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
Long Grove, WI
Long Grove, WI
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kent A. Lee
KENT A LEE REINHART BOERNER VAN DEUREN SC1000 N WATER ST STE 2100MILWAUKEE, WI 53201-2965UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Finished products used in air filtering installations, namely, material comprising a blend of polypropylene, polymethaphenylene isophtalamide, acrylic and modacrylic fibers in the nature of electrostatic non-woven fabric for use a filter media to filter the air | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 27, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 25, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 2006 | CNRT | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2006 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 30, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 27, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 27, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 24, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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 21, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 28, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Sep 28, 2004 | CNRT | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 23, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |