USPTO serial 74188900
CAR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUBOIS, SUSAN L
- 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 CAR?
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
Fredericton, New Brunswick, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Joseph A. Day
JOSEPH A DAY GOWLING, STRATHY & HENDERSONSTE 1100, 50 QUEEN ST NKITCHENER, ON N2H 6M1CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | membrane composite insulated covers for use on ponds, lagoons, basins, vessels and tanks for the treatment of waste water | ABANDONED | — |
| 042 | engineering services relating to the covering of ponds, lagoons, basins, vessels and tanks for the treatment of waste water | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 1998 | 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. |
| Jan 9, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 22, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 1996 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 1996 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 30, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 11, 1995 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 28, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 2, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 14, 1992 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 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. |
| Oct 8, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |