USPTO serial 75861738
BIOMED VALLEY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AMOS, TANYA L
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 BIOMED VALLEY?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey E. Fine
JEFFREY E FINE POLSINELLI WHITE VARDEMAN & SHALTON100 S 4TH ST STE 1110ST LOUIS, MO 63102-1825UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR HUMANS | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 2004 |
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 STOWERS INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH
- Other trademarks owned by STOWERS INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named BIOMED VALLEY
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 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. |
| Apr 16, 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. |
| Sep 7, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 7, 2004 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Aug 17, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 4, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 31, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 21, 2004 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Jul 12, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 24, 2004 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Apr 27, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Apr 27, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 3, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 31, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 29, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 25, 2003 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 24, 2003 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 18, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 16, 2002 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 30, 2001 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Aug 7, 2001 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Jul 25, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 4, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 22, 2000 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 8, 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 1, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |