USPTO serial 75931511
SOUR-BETS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LOUGHRAN, BARBARA
- 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 SOUR-BETS?
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
London Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John L. Hines, Jr., Esq.
JOHN L HINES, JR ESQ SACHNOFF & WEAVER, LTD30 S WACKER DR29TH FLCHICAGO, IL 60606Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Candy | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 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. |
| Oct 18, 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. |
| Mar 22, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 17, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 28, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 19, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 10, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 10, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 9, 2002 | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |