USPTO serial 78515313
SUPER PLUG SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SLOAN, CYNTHIA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 SUPER PLUG SYSTEM?
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.
Gregory C. Smith
GREGORY C SMITH GARVEY, SMITH, NEHRBASS & DOODY LLCTHREE LAKEWAY CTR STE 3290 3838 NOMETAIRIE, LA 70002UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | method of plugging well with fast drying cement | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 10, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 10, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Nov 29, 2006 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 29, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 3, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 1, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 1, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Feb 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 4, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 4, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 12, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | 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, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 16, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 16, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |