USPTO serial 75554403
GRAIN STATION 2000+
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STRASER, RICHARD
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 GRAIN STATION 2000+?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
GARY D KRUGMAN
GARY D KRUGMAN SUGHRUE MION ZINN MACPEAK & SEAS PLLC2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20037UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | TRAILERS FOR HAULING GRAIN | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Sep 10, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 9, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 4, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 4, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 5, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 5, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 11, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2001 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Mar 23, 2001 | 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 8, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2000 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Feb 10, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 6, 1999 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 7, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 18, 1999 | 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 11, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |