USPTO serial 73704228
KODAMA-LIVING
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 KODAMA-LIVING?
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
FUCHU-SHI, HIROSHIMA-KEN, JP
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ROBERT G. MCMORROW, P.C.
ROBERT G MCMORROW, PC SUGHRUE, MION, ZINN, MACPEAK AND SEAS2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVEWASHINGTON, DC 20037-3202UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 8, 1994 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 9, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 3, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 11, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 28, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 29, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 1, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 5, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 3, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 12, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 22, 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. |