USPTO serial 86150771
HELPFUL EXPERTS! WE ARE THE DIFFERENCE.
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MIDDLETON, BERNICE L
- 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 HELPFUL EXPERTS! WE ARE THE DIFFERENCE.?
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
Oakville, Ontario, CA
Oakville, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Howard S. Michael
Howard S. Michael BRINKS GILSON & LIONEP.O. Box 10395Chicago, IL 60610UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Provision of customer relations training programs; conducting workshops relating to designing, repairing, servicing, operating, using and maintaining shredding machinery and shredding systems | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Shred-It International ULC
- Other trademarks owned by Shred-It International ULC
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named HELPFUL EXPERTS! WE ARE THE DIFFERENCE.
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 2, 2018 | 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. |
| Jan 1, 2018 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2017 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2017 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 30, 2017 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 30, 2017 | 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. |
| Nov 29, 2016 | 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. |
| Oct 4, 2016 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2016 | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2016 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2016 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 26, 2016 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 21, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 21, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 20, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 26, 2016 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2016 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 21, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 29, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 24, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 24, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 24, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 21, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 21, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 14, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 24, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 24, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 24, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 17, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2014 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| May 14, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 8, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2014 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Apr 28, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 10, 2014 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2014 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2014 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2014 | 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 28, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 9, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Dec 26, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |