USPTO serial 76003600
QUINTE BOTANICALS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EULIN, INGRID C
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - 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 QUINTE BOTANICALS?
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
BELLEVILLE ONTARIO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
D. MICHAEL BEAN
D MICHAEL BEAN GOWLING STRATHY & HENDERSON50 QUEEN ST N STE 1020KITCHENER, ON N2H 6M2CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | HERBAL, BOTANICAL AND PHYTOPHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS USED AS NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENTS IN ANIMALS AND HUMANS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 30, 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. |
| Dec 30, 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. |
| May 31, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 16, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 29, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 16, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 27, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 24, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 24, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 1, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2000 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |