USPTO serial 75755713
CLEARVAC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEIPZIG, MARC J
- 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 CLEARVAC?
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
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 3R2, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Barry A. Solomon
NANCY E SABARRA FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU PC866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | VACCINATION FOR HEALTHY CATTLE AND CALVES AS AN AID IN THE PREVENTION OF DISEASE CAUSED BY CLOSTRIDIUM SP | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 3, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 16, 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. |
| Feb 23, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 29, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 3, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 27, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 7, 2002 | 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. |
| Feb 11, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 2, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 29, 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. |
| Jul 17, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 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. |
| Nov 1, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |