USPTO serial 78957653
DURAFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLOHM, LINDA
- Law office
- TTAB
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with DURAFLEX?
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.
Paul Herbert
CHRISTOPHER M SCHERER ANDRUS SCEALES STARKE & SAWALL LLP100 E WISCONSIN AVENUESTE 1100MILWAUKEE, WI 53202Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | Resilient and safety tiles made of rubber used as floor covering; resilient impact cushioning rubber pavement tiles; resilient impact cushioning rubber flooring tiles; and rubber paving tiles and rubber paving mats | ABANDONED | — |
| 027 | Resilient impact cushioning rubber flooring mats | ABANDONED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 13, 2012 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Mar 12, 2012 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Mar 12, 2012 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Sep 30, 2009 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Aug 20, 2009 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 28, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 8, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 23, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 23, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 23, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 23, 2009 | LIEC | LEGAL INSTRUMENT EXAMINER (LIE) - CORRECTION | — |
| Jun 23, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 23, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 18, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 14, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 14, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 4, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 30, 2009 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 3, 2008 | 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 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 9, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 8, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 8, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 8, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 3, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 3, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 19, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 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. |
| Jan 17, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 28, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |