USPTO serial 78976171
SERIOUS NUCLEIC ACID PURIFICATION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHARPER JR, SAM
- 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 SERIOUS NUCLEIC ACID PURIFICATION?
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.
Kenneth W. Bolvin
KENNETH W BOLVIN LEFFERT JAY & POLGLAZE PAPO BOX 581009MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55458-1009UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Laboratory robotics equipment consisting of a computer-controlled robot arm which moves samples between different stations that automate the extraction, isolation and purification of nucleic acids, namely, DNA and RNA; and mouse pads | 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 7, 2006 | 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 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 3, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 31, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 26, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 23, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 7, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 19, 2005 | 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. |
| May 18, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| May 18, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 18, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 15, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |