USPTO serial 73608527
DEODAIR PROCESS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- —
- 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 DEODAIR PROCESS?
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
WILLOWDALE, ONTARIO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JAMES M. SLATTERY
JAMES M SLATTERY BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH AND BIRCH301 N WASHINGTON STP O BOX 208THFALLS CHURCH, VA 22046-0209Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | AIR PURIFICATION UNITS FOR INDUSTRIAL USE | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 11, 1991 | 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. |
| Feb 11, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 19, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 12, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 21, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 11, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 22, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 21, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 20, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 6, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 24, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 6, 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. |
| Sep 19, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |