USPTO serial 76065101
DISTURB YOUR THIRST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BUTTON, JENNIFER JO
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 DISTURB YOUR THIRST?
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
Winnipeg, Manitoba, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Bruce A. Tassan
BRUCE A TASSAN4143 N 27TH STARLINGTON, VA 22207UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | non-alcoholic beverages, namely fruit flavored drinks, energy drinks and fruit flavored energy drinks | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 20, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 20, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 19, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 14, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 10, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 9, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 12, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 30, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 4, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |