USPTO serial 75641705
JOE'S GARAGE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILLISTON, JENNIFER LYNN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 JOE'S GARAGE?
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.
Sherri L. Rohlf
SHERRI L ROHLF SIEGEL, BRILL, GREUPNER, DUFFY & FOSTER1300 WASHINGTON SQ100 WASHINGTON AVE SMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Restaurant and Bar Services | ACTIVE | Jul 17, 1996 |
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 13, 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 13, 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. |
| Mar 15, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 17, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 4, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 4, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 6, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 5, 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. |
| Aug 2, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |