USPTO serial 73828295
SPORTS BALLS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELENKER, ESTHER
- 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 SPORTS BALLS?
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
WESTON, ONTARIO, CA
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
GARY M. BAHLER
GARY M BAHLER WOOLWORTH CORPORATION233 BROADWAYNEW YORK, NY 10279UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | DEODORIZERS TO BE UED IN SPORTS WEAR, SPORTS BAGS, FOOTWEAR AND LOCKERS | 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 26, 1999 | 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 1, 1998 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 13, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 13, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 10, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 10, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 25, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 30, 1992 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 3, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 5, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 4, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 30, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 9, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 23, 1990 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 21, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |