USPTO serial 76176293
STORESNEARBY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BUSH, KAREN K
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 STORESNEARBY?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Raymond C Stewart
RAYMOND C STEWART BIRCH STEWART KOLASCH & BIRCH8110 GATEHOUSE RD STE 500 EP O BOX 747FALLS CHURCH, VA 22040-0747Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Online services, namely, digital technology based services for businesses seeking to advertise products and services available at promotional or sale prices, namely, dissemination of advertising marketing and research; and providing online information to consumers to facilitate purchasing decisions | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 10, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 10, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 26, 2007 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 25, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 25, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 22, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 22, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 1, 2006 | 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. |
| May 1, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 1, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 1, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 11, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 11, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 8, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 7, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 30, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 30, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 30, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 29, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 7, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 25, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 29, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 16, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 16, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 22, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 9, 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 2, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |