USPTO serial 76314354
SOYFIT
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 SOYFIT?
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
Surrey, British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Trisha Dore
TRISHA DORE RICHARDS BUELL SUTTON401 W GEORGE ST STE 700VANCOUVER, BC V6B 5A1CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | NUTRITIONAL FOODS IN POWDER, LIQUID AND BAR FORM | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| May 2, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 1, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 26, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 5, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 25, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 6, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 28, 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 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |