USPTO serial 75648896
PLENTY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GRAY, CAROLYN
- 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 PLENTY?
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.
Charles B. Gordon
JOSEPH J CORSO PEARNE & GORDON LLP1801 E 9TH ST STE 1200CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | confectionery, namely, candies, chocolates, caramels, fudges, glucose, jellies, marmalade, candied fruit and lollipops | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 16, 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. |
| Mar 16, 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. |
| Jul 18, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 17, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 17, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 14, 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. |
| Apr 9, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 25, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 10, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 3, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 26, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 29, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 14, 2002 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| May 28, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 17, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 26, 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 | — |
| Jan 5, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 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. |
| Jun 4, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |