USPTO serial 79180952
VIAFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PHAM, LANA H
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 VIAFLEX?
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | Nonmetallic materials for building floors and roads, especially fluxed bitumen for surface dressing used in a surface course | 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 16, 2023 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| May 15, 2023 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Apr 9, 2022 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 2017 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Oct 24, 2017 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Oct 24, 2017 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 8, 2017 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jun 21, 2017 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Jun 21, 2017 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Oct 24, 2016 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2016 | 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. |
| May 13, 2016 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Mar 21, 2016 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| Mar 21, 2016 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| Mar 20, 2016 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| Mar 19, 2016 | 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 15, 2016 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 2, 2016 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2016 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jan 21, 2016 | SDRC | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A SUBSEQ DESIG FROM IB | — |