USPTO serial 76278450
CARDIO HEALTH METER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DWYER, JOHN D
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 CARDIO HEALTH METER?
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
Orangeville, Ontario, L9W 1E8, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lawrence E. Abelman
LAWRENCE E ABELMAN ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB150 E 42ND STNEW YORK, NY 10017-5612UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | MEDICAL DEVICE FOR MEASURING THE CONCENTRATION OF ELECTROLYTES IN A SAMPLE OF URINE | 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 24, 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 24, 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 26, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 25, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 6, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 6, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 26, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 10, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 12, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 16, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 4, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 6, 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. |
| Aug 21, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |