USPTO serial 79048797
RED RHINO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GLASSER, CARYN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 RED RHINO?
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.
WILLIAM C. WRIGHT
WILLIAM C. WRIGHT EPSTEIN DRANGEL BAZERMAN & JAMES, LLP60 EAST 42ND STREET, SUITE 820NEW YORK, NY 10165UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Jaw crushing machines; crushing machines for the processing of demolition waste; crushing machines for the processing of construction waste; crushing machines for the recycling of demolition waste; crushing machines for the recycling of construction waste; crushing machines for the processing of aggregates, waste, and recycled materials; crushing machines for the recycling of aggregates, waste, and recycled materials; conveyors; conveyor belts; input conveyors; screening machines for sizing, grading, separating and sifting building waste; bulldozers; chainsaws; chisels for machines; concrete mixers; cranes; cutting machines for cutting concrete, and building waste; diggers, namely, hole digging machines, diggers for excavating land; drilling machines; earth moving machines; hammers, namely, electric hammers, pneumatic hammers; electric power generators; grinding machines for stoneworking and metalworking; handling apparatus for loading and unloading machines; handling machines, namely, material handling machines in the nature of diggers, earth movers, and building waste movers; holding devices for machine tools, namely, collets, collet chucks and adaptors for attaching a cutting tool to the spindle of a power-operated machine; lifting apparatus, namely, cranes and mobile elevating work platforms; mechanical loading ramps; mufflers for motors and engines; pneumatic transporters; road making machines; road rollers; machine saws, namely, chain saws, band saws; spraying machines, namely, power-operated sprayers; stone working machines, namely, rock quarrying machines for boring, cutting and grinding stone, rock and concrete; machine tools, namely, for the cutting and forming of materials, hand-held power-driven grinders, tools for drilling, tools for boring for use with machines; electric, gas and laser welding machines; and structural parts and fittings for all the aforementioned goods | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
| 037 | Vehicle repair services; repair and maintenance of land vehicles, crushing machines, diggers; vehicle service stations; rental of crushing machines and diggers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2018 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG E-MAILED | — |
| May 4, 2018 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Dec 17, 2010 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Dec 2, 2009 | 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 2, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 31, 2009 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Apr 30, 2009 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Apr 30, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 30, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2009 | ATRV | ATTORNEY REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 1, 2009 | LIMS | LIMITATION OF GOODS/SERVICES FROM IB ENTERED | — |
| Mar 5, 2009 | LIMG | LIMITATION OF GOODS RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Sep 19, 2008 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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 19, 2008 | 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 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 15, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 12, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 12, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 21, 2008 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Feb 26, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |