USPTO serial 78617145
ACCUGRAIN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FINK, GINA 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 ACCUGRAIN?
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.
Charles B. Lyon, Raymond Rundelli, Leonard L. Lewis, John T. Wiedemann, John E. Miller, Tara A. Kastelic, John S. Cipolla, Daniel J. McMullen, Nenad Pejic, Mary E. Golrick, Pamela A. Docherty, Sean T. Moorhead, George R. Hoskins, Brian E. Kondas, Diane H.
Raymond Rundelli Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLPSuite 1400800 Superior AvenueCleveland, OH 44114-2688Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | DEVELOPING STANDARDS FOR OTHERS IN THE DESIGN OF DOOR TECHNOLOGIES | 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 TT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by TT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by THERMA-TRU CORP.
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named ACCUGRAIN
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 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 30, 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. |
| Jan 16, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Aug 20, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 20, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 2, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 2, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 2, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Apr 17, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 2, 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. |
| Oct 10, 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 20, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 21, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 19, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 17, 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. |
| Feb 28, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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 27, 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. |
| Feb 24, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 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. |
| Nov 25, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 25, 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. |
| Nov 23, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 9, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |