USPTO serial 79052666
ROCATEQ
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Reg. 3663788Status 404
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- Aug 4, 2009
- Examiner
- HAMPTON, CHARISMA
- Law office
- GENERIC WEB UPDATE
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 ROCATEQ?
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.
Jess M. Collen
JESS M. COLLEN COLLEN IP, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.80 South Highland AvenueTHE HOLYOKE-MANHATTAN BUILDINGOSSINING, NY 10562Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electronic devices activated by software, namely, electronic locks, electronic burglar alarms, electronic circuit cards, electronic data relays for sensors for anti-theft purposes of shopping carts and trolleys, by immobilizing the wheels; computer software and computer hardware for tracking, tracing and retrieval of shopping carts [ and trolleys ] | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
| 042 | Technical design and development of computer hardware and software for use with anti-theft protective systems for shopping carts [ and trolleys ], including technical design and development of computer hardware and software for controlling electronically activated devices which lock the wheels of shopping carts [ and trolleys ]; technical design and development of computer software and computer hardware for tracking, tracing and retrieval of shopping carts [ and trolleys ] | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Rocateq International B.V.
- Other trademarks owned by Rocateq International B.V.
- Other trademarks owned by Rocateq International B.V.
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named ROCATEQ
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2018 | DENC | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2018 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Aug 4, 2018 | REM4 | COURTESY REMINDER - SEC. 71 (10-YR) E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2017 | INNP | PARTIAL INVALIDATION PROCESSED BY THE IB | — |
| May 12, 2016 | INPS | PARTIAL INVALIDATION OF REG EXT PROTECTION SENT TO IB | — |
| May 12, 2016 | INPC | INVALIDATION PROCESSED | — |
| Apr 18, 2016 | INPR | PARTIAL INVALIDATION OF REG EXT PROTECTION CREATED | — |
| Aug 18, 2015 | NA71 | NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF SEC. 71 - E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2015 | 71AG | REGISTERED-SEC.71 ACCEPTED | — |
| Aug 18, 2015 | APRE | CASE ASSIGNED TO POST REGISTRATION PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 16, 2015 | ES71 | TEAS SECTION 71 RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 5, 2013 | FINO | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| May 12, 2010 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| May 12, 2010 | FIMP | FINAL DISPOSITION PROCESSED | — |
| Nov 30, 2009 | CORR | CORRECTION FROM IB ENTERED - NO REVIEW REQUIRED | — |
| Nov 30, 2009 | COC. | CORRECTION UNDER SECTION 7 - PROCESSED | — |
| Nov 30, 2009 | PLGL | ASSIGNED TO PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 4, 2009 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Oct 9, 2009 | CRCV | CORRECTION TRANSACTION RECEIVED FROM IB | — |
| Aug 4, 2009 | R.PR | REGISTERED-PRINCIPAL REGISTER | Your trademark is registered on the Principal Register — the strongest form of federal trademark protection. You may use the ® symbol for the covered goods and services. Maintenance filings (Section 8 and renewals) are required to keep the registration alive. |
| May 19, 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. |
| Apr 29, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 10, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 9, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 7, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 30, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 30, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 27, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Mar 27, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 27, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 27, 2009 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 27, 2009 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 5, 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. |
| Feb 5, 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 4, 2008 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jun 13, 2008 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 13, 2008 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Jun 13, 2008 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Jun 12, 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. |
| Jun 3, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 23, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| May 22, 2008 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |