USPTO serial 74428060
MODIFIER ROD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MATTHEWS, AMOS
- 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 MODIFIER ROD?
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
Toronto, Ontario, M5W 1G5, 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 STEVENS & REPPERT225 FRANKLIN ST STE 3300BOSTON, MA 02110UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | strontium-aluminum alloys of various forms | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 21, 2001 | 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. |
| Dec 22, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 9, 1999 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 11, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 1998 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 15, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 22, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 4, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 1996 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 5, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 12, 1995 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 22, 1994 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 25, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |