USPTO serial 76032429
RE JOLLY RO DO MI SNC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VERHOSEK, WILLIAM T
- 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 RE JOLLY RO DO MI SNC?
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
RO.DO.MI. s.n.c. di Rocco Albano & C.
20064 Gorgonzola (MI), IT
Other trademarks owned by RO.DO.MI. s.n.c. di Rocco Albano & C.
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
MICHAEL E. BARBER
MICHAEL E BARBER VISOMARK LAW GRP LLC1809 7TH AVE STE 411SEATTLE, WA 98101-4403UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | HAND OPERATED LIFTING APPARATUS, NAMELY FLOOR JACKS FOR LIFTING, MOUNTING, AND DISMOUNTING A DOOR TO A DOORJAMB | 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 27, 2006 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Sep 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 20, 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. |
| Feb 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 23, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 29, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 14, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 13, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 13, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Sep 13, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 20, 2001 | 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 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 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. |
| Oct 20, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |