USPTO serial 78755669
PERFECT WATER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GRIFFIN, JAMES
- 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 PERFECT WATER?
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.
GRANT R. CLAYTON
GRANT R CLAYTON CLAYTON, HOWARTH & CANNON PCPO BOX 1909SANDY, UT 84091UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | Bottled drinking water, namely, reverse ionized cleansed water sold primarily through health food and grocery outlets to retail consumers seeking premium bottled drinking water | 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 Electric Aquagenics Unlimited, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by EAU TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by EAU TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 032
- Similar marks named PERFECT WATER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 15, 2014 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2014 | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2014 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 2014 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 14, 2014 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 14, 2014 | 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. |
| Sep 12, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2013 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 6, 2013 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 14, 2013 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2013 | 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. |
| Feb 16, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | 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. |
| Aug 14, 2012 | NOAM | NOA E-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. |
| Jun 19, 2012 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2012 | 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. |
| May 30, 2012 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| May 17, 2012 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 14, 2012 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 9, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 31, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 29, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 27, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 21, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 20, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 20, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 11, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 11, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 7, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 27, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Dec 26, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Sep 5, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 31, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 23, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 30, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 6, 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. |
| Oct 6, 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. |
| May 31, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 10, 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 10, 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 2, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 22, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |