USPTO serial 75975039
HEAVE-HO 2 IN A ROW
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHAW, THOMAS V
- 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 HEAVE-HO 2 IN A ROW?
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
Manhattan Beach, CA
Manhattan Beach, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Andrew V. Galway
ANDREW V GALWAY LIDDY, SULLIVAN, GALWAY & BEGLER, PC41 MADISON AVENEW YORK, NY 10010UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | hockey equipment, namely front plates, shoulder pads, shin guard, rib and spinal pad, youth rib and back pad, adult rib and back pad, shin guard, rib and spinal pad, elbow pads, rib pads, spine pads, goalie cup protector, cup protector, pucks, sticks, helmets, gloves, mouth piece, face guard, ice skates, hockey skates and goals | ABANDONED | — |
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 24, 1997 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 1997 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 1996 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 5, 1995 | PRRD | PETITION RECONSIDERATION REQUEST DENIED | — |
| May 31, 1995 | PRRR | PETITION RECONSIDERATION REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| May 25, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 3, 1995 | 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 29, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 27, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 16, 1995 | PCDE | PETITION TO DIRECTOR DENIED | — |
| Mar 15, 1995 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Mar 2, 1995 | PILM | PETITION INQUIRY LETTER ISSUED | — |
| Feb 2, 1995 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |