USPTO serial 78960382
INTERCEPT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROSSMAN, WILLIAM M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 INTERCEPT?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Stephen C. Rohr
STEPHEN C ROHR WINEGARDEN, HALEY, LINDHOLM & ROBERTSONG-9460 S SAGINAW ST STE AGRAND BLANC, MI 48439UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Water purification units | ACTIVE | Feb 1, 1978 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 26, 2007 | 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 30, 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. |
| May 30, 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. |
| May 8, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 12, 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. |
| Sep 26, 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 26, 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 12, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 12, 2006 | RSHG | REQUEST FOR SPECIAL HANDLING - GRANTED | — |
| Aug 30, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Aug 29, 2006 | RFSH | REQUEST FOR SPECIAL HANDLING RECEIVED | — |