Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for XCELLONIX, serial 97364946, as a dated PDF. One price, one document, delivered in about a minute.
INSTANT DELIVERY
Trademark Status Report
$7.99
The USPTO's own status record for this mark, on one dated page.
- Current status with a plain-English verdict
- Owner, classes, filing basis, and every key date
- The mark as it appears on the federal record
- Every prosecution event, filing to today
- Source-cited with the exact retrieval date
Built from the USPTO's TSDR record. Assignment chain of title and TTAB proceeding files sit in separate USPTO systems and are not included.
Preview
◆ TRADEMARKCHECKER.AITRADEMARK STATUS REPORT
XCELLONIXSerial 97364946 · Principal Register
Pending · Under Examination
Owner: Atif Zafar
Class 009 - Electrical & Scientific Apparatus
Class 042 - Scientific & Technology Services
Filed Apr 15, 2022
The record shows a live, pending application for the mark XCELLONIX owned by individual Atif Zafar; it has not yet issued a registration and remains under examination on the Principal Register. The goods and services listed fall in class 009 (electrical and scientific apparatus such as computer programming software and hardware for slow‑scan television picture and audio transmission, memory chips, video processors, hard drives and related mainframe systems) and class 042 (temporary online use of non‑downloadable software and hardware for the same transmission and digital signal processing functions). A similar name would raise the closest record‑based concern if used for any of those computer‑related products or services, because the USPTO description is fairly specific to that technical field. The record does not give the owner control over every possible use of the word “XCELLONIX” in unrelated areas. The prosecution history shows a series of extensions of time to file a Statement of Use, with the most recent notice of approval of the fifth extension dated Sep 10 2026 and the status date Sep 09 2026. No oppositions, cancellations or court actions appear in the supplied history. I'd treat this as a meaningful concern if you plan to market software or hardware in the same technical niche.
Full event history, owner details, and verdict inside.
The way I'd use it, honestly, is as the thing you attach when a bank, a marketplace, or a co-founder asks "are we clear on the name". It answers in one page.