USPTO serial 75771740
THE INFO-PATCH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AYALA, LOURDES
- 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 THE INFO-PATCH?
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
Markham, Ontario L3R 0C8, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
PAUL A KELLER
PAUL A KELLER HARNESS DICKEY & PIERCE PLCP O BOX 828BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48303UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 016 | labels, not consisting of textile, containing informational materials | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 29, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 29, 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 26, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 23, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 30, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 13, 2000 | 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 8, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |