USPTO serial 75600639
Serial No. 75600639
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BERK, STEVEN R
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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. 75600639?
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.
Sally S. Benson
STEVEN BROWER STEPHAN ORINGHER RICHMAN & THEODORA535 ANTON BLVD STE 800COSTA MESA, CA 92653UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | air fresheners | ACTIVE | Nov 2, 1992 |
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 6, 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 6, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 8, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 28, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 28, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 6, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 12, 2001 | 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. |
| Oct 13, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 13, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 24, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 12, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 10, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 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. |
| Jul 1, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 29, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 28, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 22, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 18, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 14, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |