USPTO serial 75267518
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
Caracas 1010A, VE
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
GREGORY P LAPOINTE
GREGORY P LAPOINTE BACHMAN & LAPOINTE PC900 CHAPEL ST STE 1201NEW HAVEN, CT 06510-2802UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | catalysts for use in the treatment of hydrocarbon feedstocks in petroleum industries | ACTIVE | — |
| 004 | fuels and lubricants, namely, petroleum oils, general purpose greases and industrial lubricants | ACTIVE | — |
| 019 | bitumen-based asphalt sealants and compounds | ACTIVE | — |
| 039 | freight transportation by land vehicle and pipeline of hydrocarbon products and storage of hydrocarbon products | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | engineering in the field of petroleum engineering, namely, petroleum processing, refining and burning | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2005 | 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. |
| May 14, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 13, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 4, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 6, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 6, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 6, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 8, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2002 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jul 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 24, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 18, 1999 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 14, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 5, 1998 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 18, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 10, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |