USPTO serial 78496652
PROCAPS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MAHONEY, PAULA 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 PROCAPS?
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
Ville St. Laurent, CA
Ville St. Laurent Quebec, CA
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Liquid cleaners for paintball gun barrels | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | protective eyewear | ACTIVE | — |
| 028 | Paintballs; paintball equipment, namely pneumatic guns for the firing of paintballs, paintball markers, paintball hoppers, paintball loading equipment, paintball harnesses, paintball barrels, paintball equipment belts; protective padding for playing paintball games, and protective face masks | 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 Procaps Encapsulation Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by PROCAPS L.P.
- Other trademarks owned by PROCAPS L.P.
- Other trademarks in Class 003
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 028
- Similar marks named PROCAPS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 29, 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. |
| Jul 29, 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. |
| Jul 29, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Sep 1, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 17, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 17, 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. |
| Dec 19, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 26, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 6, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 8, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 27, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | ZZAX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE WITHDRAWN-TIMELY AAU | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | PBSR | WITHDRAWN FROM PUB - SENIOR ATTORNEY REQUEST | — |
| Jul 6, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 6, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 9, 2006 | 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. |
| May 17, 2006 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Nov 18, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 11, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 11, 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. |
| May 14, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 14, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 11, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 15, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |