USPTO serial 78966043
INTEGRA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OKEKE, BENJAMIN
- 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 INTEGRA?
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.
Michele P. Schwartz
MICHELE P SCHWARTZ ANDREWS KURTH LLP1717 MAIN ST STE 3700DALLAS, TX 75201-7301UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 Integra Healthcare Holdings, Ltd.
- Other trademarks owned by Integra Healthcare Holdings, Ltd.
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 044
- Similar marks named INTEGRA
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2010 | 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. |
| May 10, 2010 | 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. |
| Oct 6, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 21, 2009 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| May 6, 2009 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 7, 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. |
| Mar 18, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 4, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 3, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 2, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 16, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 7, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Sep 26, 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 11, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 11, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 30, 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 29, 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 26, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 7, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |