USPTO serial 73611843
BIOSCAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CORNELIUS, ANNE
- 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 BIOSCAL?
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
CONCORD, ONTARIO, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | HAIR CARE AND HAIR GROWTH ENHANCING PREPARATIONS NAMELY SHAMPOO, HAIR AND SCALP REVITALIZER, AND RINSE | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 7, 1992 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 1991 | 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. |
| Jul 26, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 1, 1990 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 22, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 25, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 28, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 17, 1988 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 4, 1986 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 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. |
| Oct 22, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 21, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |