USPTO serial 75874076
GIFTS FOR KIDS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELL, MARLENE D
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 GIFTS FOR KIDS?
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
Toronto, Ontario M5H 2S8, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Janet Dore
DOCKET ADMINSTRATOR MORGAN & FINNEGAN LLP3 WORLD FINANCIAL CTRNEW YORK, NY 10281-2101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | Charitable fundraising services effected by selling merchandise via direct mail catalogue and online catalogue | 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 19, 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. |
| Sep 17, 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. |
| Feb 8, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 22, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 20, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 26, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 15, 2003 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 15, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2003 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jun 14, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 31, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 31, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 31, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 22, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 8, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 22, 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 16, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 12, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |