USPTO serial 75650144
GT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLANDU, FLORENTINA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 GT?
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
San Jose, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jonathan O. Scott
STEVE D BEYER BEYER WEAVER & THOMAS LLPPO BOX 70250OAKLAND, CA 94612-0250UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | HOME SECURITY DEVICES, NAMELY DOOR JAMBS, DOOR AND WINDOW LOCKS, CHAIN LOCKS, AND PEEPHOLE VIEWERS | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | CONSUMER ELECTRONICS, NAMELY TELEPHONES, CALCULATORS, RADIOS AND INFANT MONITORING DEVICES | ACTIVE | — |
| 028 | PLASTIC TOYS, NAMELY PLASTIC VEHICLE TOYS AND PLASTIC KITCHENWARE TOYS; ELECTRONIC TOYS, NAMELY HAND-HELD UNITS FOR PLAYING VIDEO GAMES; AND MECHANICAL TOYS | ACTIVE | — |
| 029 | CANNED FOODS, NAMELY, VEGETABLES, FRUIT, MEAT AND FISH | ACTIVE | — |
| 030 | DRY FOOD PRODUCTS, NAMELY, RICE, NOODLES AND FLOUR | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Getco. Inc
- Other trademarks in Class 006
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 028
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Other trademarks in Class 030
- Similar marks named GT
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 22, 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. |
| Nov 22, 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. |
| Apr 20, 2005 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Apr 20, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 19, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 25, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 17, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 25, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2000 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 31, 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 16, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 13, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |