USPTO serial 78858460
WHO KNOWS WATER BETTER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BROWN, BARBARA TROFFKIN
- 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 WHO KNOWS WATER BETTER?
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.
Terrence H. Link II
Terrence H. Link II Roetzel & Andress, LPA222 S. Main St.Akron, OH 44308UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Water system pumps and motors, namely, centrifugal pumps, submersible pumps, sump pumps, jet pumps, sewage pumps, effluent pumps, circulator pumps, multi-stage pumps, and submersible electric motors for use with pumps | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | Controls for operating and protecting submersible electric motors for pumps | 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 Pentair Water Group, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Pentair Water Group, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 007
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named WHO KNOWS WATER BETTER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 20, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 20, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 25, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 17, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 17, 2008 | 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 18, 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. |
| Jun 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 12, 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. |
| Mar 12, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 25, 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. |
| Sep 25, 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 20, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 18, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |