USPTO serial 73600107
FARMATIC-MILL-KITS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- REIHNER, DAVID
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with FARMATIC-MILL-KITS?
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.
Owner
LONDON, ONTARIO, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | ON-FARM FEED PROCESSOR AND MATERIAL HANDLER COMPRISING A MILL AND FEED CONVEYOR | ABANDONED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 26, 1993 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jan 5, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 16, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 10, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 30, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 28, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 19, 1988 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 31, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 6, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 11, 1986 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Aug 4, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 1, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |