USPTO serial 75856445
BANNERBLIND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- Dec 24, 2002
- Examiner
- SMIGA, HOWARD
- Law office
- SCANNING ON DEMAND
What this means
Status 710 means the registration was cancelled because a required Section 8 declaration of continued use was not filed within the deadline (including any grace period). The federal registration is no longer active. Evaluate filing a new application if you still use the mark, or petition if cancellation was erroneous. Consult counsel on remaining common-law rights.
Need help with BANNERBLIND?
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
Traverse City, MI
Traverse City, MI
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Stephen J. Schoenow
STEPHEN J SCHOENOW HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC450 West Fourth StreetRoyal Oak, MI 48067-2557UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | MODULAR DISPLAY UNIT COMPRISING TUBULAR PLASTIC OR METAL FRAME AND BANNER | SECTION 8 - CANCELLED | — |
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 26, 2015 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 1, 2009 | C8.. | CANCELLED SEC. 8 (6-YR) | — |
| Mar 5, 2008 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 29, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 24, 2002 | R.SR | REGISTERED-SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | Your mark is registered on the Supplemental Register, which is available for marks that are not yet distinctive enough for the Principal Register but can still identify a source. Protection is more limited than Principal Register registration but can later support a Principal Register application. |
| Oct 15, 2002 | CNTA | APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 13, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 20, 2002 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Jun 20, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 20, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jul 13, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 16, 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. |
| Oct 4, 2000 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| May 19, 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. |
| May 2, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |