USPTO serial 85488622
ALU-MIGHT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KAVEESHVAR, JUHI
- 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 ALU-MIGHT?
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.
Peter C. Stomma
PETER C. STOMMA BOYLE FREDRICKSON SC840 N PLANKINTON AVEMILWAUKEE, WI 53203-1802UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Mechanical framing in the nature of metal structural frame sections for use in a wide variety of applications, including as machinery framing, furniture framing, door framing, window framing, building wall framing, building ceiling framing, building foundation framing, scaffolding framing; framing for performance stages; framing for trestles; Component parts for the aforesaid framing, namely, metal corners, hinges, plates for attaching hinges, slides for window and door framing, and connectors for connecting the framing together | ACTIVE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2014 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 1, 2014 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Feb 19, 2014 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2014 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 17, 2014 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jan 17, 2014 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 17, 2014 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jul 30, 2013 | NOAM | NOA E-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. |
| Jun 4, 2013 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2013 | 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. |
| May 15, 2013 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 26, 2013 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 25, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 12, 2013 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 10, 2013 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 10, 2013 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2013 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2013 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 24, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 15, 2012 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 15, 2012 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 22, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 21, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 21, 2012 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2012 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 27, 2012 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 27, 2012 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 20, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 13, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |