USPTO serial 75862346
HOTELWORKS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VANSTON, KATHY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 HOTELWORKS?
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
Vancouver, B.C. V5Z 4G4, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lalitha Mani
LALITHA MANI PERKINS COIE LLP1201 THIRD AVE STE 4800SEATTLE, WA 98101-3099UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Hotel equipment, namely lighting equipment consisting of floor lamps, table lamps, chandeliers, wall sconces, lanterns, and flashmounted lights, electric coffee makers, microwave ovens for cooking, and toasters | ACTIVE | — |
| 020 | Hotel furnishings, namely upholstered furniture including chairs, sofas, and loveseats, tables, lamp tables, coffee tables, and beds | ACTIVE | Mar 31, 1999 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2006 | 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 24, 2006 | 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 21, 2005 | 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 21, 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. |
| Mar 7, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 25, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 21, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 13, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 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. |
| Apr 13, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |