Trademark applications and grants for Rhone Poulenc Films. Rhone Poulenc Films has 6 trademark applications. The latest application filed is for "CLARYLENE"
Patent Application | Date |
---|---|
Thick composite polyester films 4,883,706 - 07/137,067 Grosjean November 28, 1 | 1989-11-28 |
Novel oriented polyester film composites 4,880,700 - 07/084,219 Charmot , et al. November 14, 1 | 1989-11-14 |
Stretched, composite polyester films usable particularly for graphic arts 4,840,836 - 07/262,172 Eyraud June 20, 1 | 1989-06-20 |
Biaxially drawn, filled polyester film substrates 4,654,249 - 06/630,415 Barbey , et al. March 31, 1 | 1987-03-31 |
Biaxially drawn, composite polyester film substrates 4,615,939 - 06/630,574 Corsi , et al. October 7, 1 | 1986-10-07 |
Mark Image Registration | Serial | Trademark Application Date |
---|---|
![]() "CLARYLENE" 1983372 74549338 |
CLARYLENE 1994-07-14 |
![]() "CLARYL" 1794938 74318927 |
CLARYL 1992-09-16 |
![]() "MAGPHANE" 1723762 74162472 |
MAGPHANE 1991-05-01 |
![]() "CLARYLENE" 1468319 73644028 |
CLARYLENE 1987-02-10 |
![]() "CLARYL" 1404042 73569572 |
CLARYL 1985-11-21 |
![]() "TERPHANE" 1298811 73445530 |
TERPHANE 1983-09-27 |
uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.
While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.