USPTO serial 76305579
Serial No. 76305579
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LOWRY, LEIGH A
- 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 Serial No. 76305579?
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
WOODBRIDGE, ONTARIO, CA
Royal Group Technologies Limited
Woodbridge, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Bradley W. Grout
Bradley W. Grout Hunton & Williams LLP600 Peachtree Street, N.E.Bank of America Plaza, Suite 4100Atlanta, GA 30308-2216Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Electrical junction boxes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 26, 2010 | 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. |
| Oct 26, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 19, 2010 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2010 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Mar 19, 2010 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 24, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 23, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 24, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 3, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 3, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 3, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 3, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 2, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 7, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 7, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 30, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 5, 2007 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Apr 5, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 29, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 3, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 27, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 26, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 6, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Jul 15, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 15, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| May 25, 2004 | 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. |
| Feb 20, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 8, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Nov 16, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 5, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |