USPTO serial 75331660
TRUSTELLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DONINGER, CHRISTOPHER G
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - SENIOR ATTORNEY
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 TRUSTELLE?
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
Vancouver, British Columbia, V6C 3H1, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
FRED W HATHAWAY
FRED W HATHAWAY BURNS DOANE SWECKER & MATHIS LLPP O BOX 1404ALEXANDRIA, VA 22313-1404UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | pharmaceutical preparations, namely, douches and medications for treating vaginal infections, discharges and odors; feminine hygiene products, namely, tampons, sanitary pads, and incontinence pads | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Aug 3, 2004 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 28, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 16, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 14, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 29, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 29, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 1999 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 10, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 23, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 16, 1998 | 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. |
| Mar 6, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 5, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 5, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |