USPTO serial 76119771
ALKALIZER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HICKEY,TONI
- 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 ALKALIZER?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Charles I. Brodsky, Esq
CHARLES I BRODSKY ESQ2 BUCKS LNMARLBORO, NJ 07746UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Concentrated organic electrolyte dietary supplements in the form of bulk powder of organic potassium, sodium, calcium chloride, phosphorous, magnesium and other electrolyte minerals taken with meals in rounded teaspoon dosage | ACTIVE | Jan 15, 1995 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 25, 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. |
| Jan 25, 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. |
| Jun 28, 2004 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 22, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 12, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 7, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 2003 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 19, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 12, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 8, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 8, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 22, 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. |
| Jun 22, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 22, 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. |
| Jan 19, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |