USPTO serial 78575038
SPONGEPOCKET POWER LE POUVOIR SPONGIE-POCHETTES ABSORBENCY & STRENGTH ABSORBANCE ET FORCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DEFORD, JEFFREY S
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105
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 SPONGEPOCKET POWER LE POUVOIR SPONGIE-POCHETTES ABSORBENCY & STRENGTH ABSORBANCE ET FORCE?
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
MISSISSAUGA, CA
Mississauga, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Susan Neuberger Weller,
Susan Neuberger Weller, Esq. Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky & Popeo, P.C.701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Suite 900Washington, DC 20004Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 016 | Paper products, namely, paper towels, bathroom and facial tissue, napkins | 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 KRUGER PRODUCTS LIMITED
- Other trademarks owned by Scott Paper Limited
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Similar marks named SPONGEPOCKET POWER LE POUVOIR SPONGIE-POCHETTES ABSORBENCY & STRENGTH ABSORBANCE ET FORCE
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Apr 22, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 23, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Apr 24, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 23, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 21, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 11, 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. |
| Oct 11, 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. |
| Sep 21, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 10, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 24, 2006 | RGRR | REINSTATEMENT GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| May 15, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Apr 28, 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 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. |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 20, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 5, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |