USPTO serial 75400366
Serial No. 75400366
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AXILBUND, MELVIN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 Serial No. 75400366?
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
MALMESBURY, WILTSHIRE, GB
Welland, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ANDREW N. SPIVAK
ANDREW N SPIVAK MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP1650 TYSONS BLVD STE 300MCLEAN, VA 22102-3915UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | VACUUM CLEANERS AND REPLACEMENT BINS THEREFOR | ACTIVE | Feb 19, 1991 |
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, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 23, 2006 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 23, 2006 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 23, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Feb 23, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jan 31, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jan 24, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 28, 2004 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 29, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 17, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 24, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 4, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 19, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 23, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 22, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 1999 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Dec 11, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 24, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 28, 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. |
| Feb 19, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |