USPTO serial 74305262
H
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- POWERS, ALEXANDER L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 H?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
GARY D. KRUGMAN
GARY D KRUGMAN SUGHRUE MION ZINN MACPEAK & SEAS PLL2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20037-3202UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | blood substitutes | ACTIVE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 1, 2008 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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 1, 2008 | 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. |
| May 5, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 2, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 2, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 2, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 25, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 26, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 26, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 23, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 13, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jan 18, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 7, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 28, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 27, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 27, 2005 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jun 23, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 19, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 28, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 6, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 13, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 2, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 14, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 1, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 1998 | 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 1, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 31, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 8, 1996 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 29, 1995 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 1995 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 24, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 25, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 4, 1992 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 2, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |