USPTO serial 76035458
CUSTOM VISION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMITH, BRIDGETT G
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 CUSTOM VISION?
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
Richmond Hill, Ontario L4B 3Z6, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Linda M. Byrne
LINDA M BYRNE MERCHANT & GOULD PCP O BOX 2910MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-0910UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Medical and eye surgical services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 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. |
| May 16, 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. |
| Oct 1, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 4, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 4, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 30, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | 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 7, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 7, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 11, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 16, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 16, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 13, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 15, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 27, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 20, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 2000 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |