USPTO serial 86779042
GREENFLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MORRIS, KRISTINA KLOIBER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 GREENFLEX?
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
West Palm Beach, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mary Vidal Hays
MARY VIDAL HAYS ARONBERG GOLDGEHN DAVIS & GARMISA330 N WABASHSUITE 1700CHICAGO, IL 60611Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | plasticizers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2017 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 25, 2017 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 25, 2017 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 3, 2017 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 8, 2017 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2017 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2017 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 2, 2017 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 15, 2017 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 15, 2017 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 15, 2017 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 15, 2017 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Aug 15, 2016 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2016 | 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. |
| Aug 15, 2016 | 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. |
| Jul 22, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 22, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 22, 2016 | 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 23, 2016 | 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 23, 2016 | 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 23, 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. |
| Jan 15, 2016 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 14, 2015 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 13, 2015 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |