USPTO serial 74609674
REGIOTEK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ERVIN, INGA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - 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 REGIOTEK?
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.
LAWRENCE E. ABELMAN
LAWRENCE E ABELMAN ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 3RD AVE 10TH FLNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | portable hunting chairs | ACTIVE | Jul 14, 1988 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 17, 2011 | 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. |
| Nov 17, 2011 | 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. |
| Apr 21, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 24, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 23, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 18, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 18, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 9, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 5, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 19, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 18, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 28, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 28, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 28, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 22, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 23, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 22, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 14, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 12, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 8, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 6, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 14, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 13, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 14, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 25, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 6, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 28, 2003 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 2, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 10, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 14, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 6, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 17, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 1999 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 15, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 1996 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 18, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 15, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 9, 1995 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 1995 | 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 28, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |