USPTO serial 76229778
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
HARRIET E PERKINS
HARRIET E PERKINS DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP18TH & CHERRY STSONE LOGAN SQPHILADELPHIA, PA 19102| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail store services featuring convenience store items and gasoline | ABANDONED | Nov 26, 1989 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2008 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | CU.T | CONCURRENT USE TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | CU.T | CONCURRENT USE TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | CU.D | CONCURRENT USE DENIED NO. 999999 | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | CU.D | CONCURRENT USE DENIED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | CU.I | CONCURRENT USE PROC. INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 14, 2006 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Feb 22, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 30, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 27, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 13, 2006 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Nov 15, 2005 | PBCR | WITHDRAWN FROM PUB - OG REVIEW QUERY | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 15, 2004 | 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 13, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Sep 26, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 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. |
| Feb 27, 2003 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 19, 2002 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 9, 2002 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 9, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 6, 2002 | 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. |
| Dec 3, 2001 | 1.AD | SEC. 1(A) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Dec 3, 2001 | 1.BA | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM ADDED | — |
| Dec 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 29, 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. |
| May 16, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |