USPTO serial 74246480
CONTRELLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHOS, LESLIE BISHOP
- 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 CONTRELLE?
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
Espergaerde, DK
Nottingham NG7 3EN, GB
Limassol, CY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kurt R. Benson
KURT R BENSON SALTER & MICHAELSON321 S MAIN STPROVIDENCE, RI 02903UNITED 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.
- Other trademarks owned by COLOPLAST A/S
- Other trademarks owned by FEMCARE LIMITED
- Other trademarks owned by FEMCARE (CYPRUS) LIMITED
- Other trademarks in Class 005
- Other trademarks in Class 010
- Similar marks named CONTRELLE
- Prosecution event ABN2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 14, 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. |
| Jul 21, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 18, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 13, 1995 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 13, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 6, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 1, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 20, 1993 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 14, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 20, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 1992 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 1992 | 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 29, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |