USPTO serial 78698803
CITROSQUEEZE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CROWLEY, SEAN MICHAEL
- 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 CITROSQUEEZE?
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
Huntington Beach, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Chris Garber
CHRIS GARBER KLINEDINST PC501 W.BROADWAY STE 600SAN DIEGO, CA 92101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Cleaning compounds for use in removing oils, greases, and inks from equipment, clothing, gear, floors, walls, and structures | ACTIVE | Nov 30, 1992 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 2, 2007 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | EXAR | TEAS EXPRESS ABANDONMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | 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 13, 2007 | 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. |
| May 11, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 11, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 5, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 15, 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. |
| Mar 15, 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. |
| Mar 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 31, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |