USPTO serial 73629658
CROCODILE DUNDEE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- O LEAR, JANICE
- 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 CROCODILE DUNDEE?
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
HAMILTON, ONTARIO, CA
HAMILTON ONTARIO, CA
HAMILTON, ONTARIO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CHRISTOPHER SCOTT
CHRISTOPHER SCOTT C/O MARK HOWLEY ROGERS & SCOTTSTE 201277 LAKESHORE RD EOAKVILLE, ON L6J 6J3Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | MENS' AND WOMENS' SPORTSWEAR, NAMELY, SHIRTS, PANTS, SHORTS, SWEATERS AND JACKETS, SPORTSHIRTS, AND SLACKS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 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. |
| Jul 17, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 18, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 15, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 22, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 29, 1988 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 1, 1988 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 23, 1987 | 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. |
| Jun 9, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 22, 1987 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| May 21, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 27, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 12, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |