USPTO serial 74312706
LEAN PLUS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PESKA, KEVIN
- 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 LEAN PLUS?
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
Scarborough, Ontario M1L 3J8, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Timothy H. Hiebert
TIMOTHY H HIEBERT SAMUELS, GAUTHIER & STEVENS225 FRANKLIN ST STE 3300BOSTON, MA 02110UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | natural food additive; namely, a low fat binder for non-nutritional purposes for use as a flavouring, ingredient or filler in food products | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 2, 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. |
| Mar 2, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 15, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 12, 1996 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 6, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 10, 1995 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 29, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 26, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 19, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 12, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 13, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 17, 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 30, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 30, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |