USPTO serial 73768202
ROOF GARD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- COLE RICHARD G
- 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 ROOF GARD?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | ROOF PROTECTIVE PADS | ABANDONED | Nov 17, 1983 |
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 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. |
| Dec 7, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 18, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 19, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 7, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 16, 1990 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 30, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 27, 1990 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 12, 1990 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 21, 1989 | 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. |
| Mar 24, 1989 | 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. |
| Feb 21, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 30, 1989 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |