USPTO serial 74465334
MORE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHARPER JR, SAM
- 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 MORE?
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
Rexdale, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John S. Hale
JOHN S HALE GIPPLE & HALE6667-B OLD DOMINION DRMCLEAN, VA 22101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | non-carbonated and non alcoholic fruit juice based bottled drinks | 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 28, 1999 | 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. |
| Feb 16, 1999 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 28, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 5, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 1, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 31, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 23, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 20, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 10, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 23, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 4, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 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. |
| May 2, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 28, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |