USPTO serial 75579726
BACK DOOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MULLEN, MARK
- 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 BACK DOOR?
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.
Julianne B. Bochinski
JULIANNE B BOCHINSKIP O BOX 375CANTON, CT 06019UNITED STATESGoods and services
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, 2004 | 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, 2004 | 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, 2004 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 26, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 10, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 24, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 22, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 14, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 1999 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Dec 23, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 1, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 17, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 17, 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. |
| Mar 4, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 4, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |