USPTO serial 76324381
PETROFUND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KEATING, MICHAEL P
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 PETROFUND?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffery L. Van Hoosear, Esq
STACEY R HALPERN ESQ KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP2040 MAIN ST 14TH FLIRVINE, CA 92614UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | financial services, namely, investment consultation and management, financial research, analysis and consultation, portfolio management, establishing mutual funds for others, mutual fund investments, investment and trust company services, commodity brokerage, exchange, and investment advice, financial information provided by electronic means, futures exchanges services, on-line banking services; financial investment services in the field of oil and gas | 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 20, 2007 | 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 20, 2007 | 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 24, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 9, 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. |
| Jul 12, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 4, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Jun 28, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 1, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 30, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 29, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 23, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 26, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 24, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 24, 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. |
| Jan 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |