USPTO serial 86402080
POWERLINE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCCRAY, RENEE
- 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 POWERLINE?
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
8075 Hart bei Graz, AT
8075 Hart bei Graz, AT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CECELIA M. PERRY
CECELIA M. PERRY MCGLEW AND TUTTLE, P.C.SCARBOROUGH STASCARBOROUGH, NY 10510UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Conveying system equipment and component parts thereof, namely, belt conveyor, conveyor belt, modular plastic conveyor, tooth belt conveyor, V-belt conveyor, drag chain conveyor, roller conveyor, belt-driven live roller conveyor, roller accumulation conveyor, shoe sorter, lane combiner, multiple belt conveyor, empty carton conveyor, tapered roller curve, belt turn, for use in commissioning plants; electronic measuring, regulating, control and security devices being parts of machines for use in conveying units and machines in commissioning plants | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | Computer hardware, data processors and related software for use in database management in the fields of conveying and commissioning technology | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Computer software development, updating, design and installation in the area of conveying technology and commissioning technology; technical consulting on the use of the above-mentioned software, namely, software for database management in the fields of conveying and commissioning technology; computer and computer hardware development in the area of conveying technology and commissioning technology | 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 KNAPP AG
- Other trademarks owned by KNAPP AG
- Other trademarks in Class 007
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named POWERLINE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 16, 2016 | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2016 | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2015 | 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. |
| May 19, 2015 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| May 19, 2015 | 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, 2015 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2015 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 11, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 21, 2015 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 20, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 19, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 2015 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2015 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2015 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2015 | 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. |
| Jan 8, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 1, 2014 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 30, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Sep 25, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |