USPTO serial 79012949
CRYOFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINKER, ANTHONY MICHAEL
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 CRYOFLEX?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Flexible metal thermal insulating tubes and pipes for transporting liquid gas | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
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 18, 2016 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Jan 9, 2016 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2016 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Mar 4, 2010 | CHLD | CHANGE OF OWNER RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Nov 12, 2009 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 15, 2007 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Feb 1, 2007 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 1, 2007 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 2006 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Jan 16, 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. |
| Jan 16, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 2, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Sep 1, 2005 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |