USPTO serial 74286172
CONTRACTOR CHOICE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MIRMAN, DONNA
- 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 CONTRACTOR CHOICE?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Gregory M. Edalatpour
GREGORY M EDALATPOUR KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEARSIXTEENTH FL620 NEWPORT CTR DRNEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | metal bolts, metal nuts, plain metal washers, helical spring lock washers, metal screws, lag screw shields, wood screw shields/sheetmetal screw shields, metal hooks, metal U-hooks, metal S-hooks, metal square-bend hooks, eyes, metal and threaded fasteners, metal fastening anchors for securing pictures to walls, nails, metal tacks, metal brads, metal cotter pins, metal clips, snaps, metal rings, metal hook-and-eye assemblies, metal turnbuckles, metal pulleys, metal chain links, wire rope, metal rods, hot rolled and cold rolled steel | ABANDONED | May 16, 1992 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 16, 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. |
| Jan 25, 1994 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Dec 13, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 1993 | 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 19, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 30, 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. |
| Nov 18, 1992 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Nov 2, 1992 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 14, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 1992 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Sep 16, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 14, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |