USPTO serial 78978411
K-TECH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 605
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LE, KHANH M
- 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 K-TECH?
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
Gebr. Poppelmann Kunststoffwerk-Werkzeugbau, e.Kfr. Gertrud Poppelmann
Lohne, DE
Other trademarks owned by Gebr. Poppelmann Kunststoffwerk-Werkzeugbau, e.Kfr. Gertrud Poppelmann
Gebr. Poppelmann Kunststoffwerk-Werkzeugbau, e.Kfr. Gertrud Poppelmann
Lohne, DE
Other trademarks owned by Gebr. Poppelmann Kunststoffwerk-Werkzeugbau, e.Kfr. Gertrud Poppelmann
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Karen K. Hammond
Robert J. Morgan Porter Wright Morris & Arthur41 South High StreetSuite 2900Columbus, OH 43215Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Parts of plastic for circulation pumps for liquid media and for hydraulic, pneumatic and electric machines, namely, cable bushings, cable holders, cable routings, holders for electrical connectors, mechanical fasteners, protective covers for protection against dirt, damage and injury, all for use in medical equipment | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Gebr. Poppelmann Kunststoffwerk-Werkzeugbau, e.Kfr. Gertrud Poppelmann
- Other trademarks owned by Gebr. Poppelmann Kunststoffwerk-Werkzeugbau, e.Kfr. Gertrud Poppelmann
- Other trademarks in Class 010
- Similar marks named K-TECH
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 21, 2008 | MAB5 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 21, 2008 | ABN5 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 21, 2008 | EXAR | TEAS EXPRESS ABANDONMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 21, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 30, 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. |
| Aug 7, 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. |
| Jul 18, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 4, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 4, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 30, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 11, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 11, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 11, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 21, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 21, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 13, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Dec 13, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 22, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 22, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 22, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 22, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 26, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 25, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Apr 6, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 16, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 26, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 21, 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. |
| Apr 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 29, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 15, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 10, 2003 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 9, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 4, 2003 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |