USPTO serial 76342452
HOWLIN' COYOTE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PEETE, KYLE C
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 HOWLIN' COYOTE?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert E. Heller
ROBERT E HELLER ROBERT E HELLER LAW FIRM525 LAKE AVE SDULUTH, MN 55802UNITED STATESGoods and services
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.
- Other trademarks owned by Luigino's, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Luigino's, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by MICHELINA'S, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 029
- Other trademarks in Class 030
- Similar marks named HOWLIN' COYOTE
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Aug 10, 2005 | 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 9, 2005 | CNRT | SU - NON-FINAL ACTION - WRITTEN | 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 2, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Dec 1, 2004 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 23, 2004 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Nov 23, 2004 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 9, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 27, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 27, 2004 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| May 6, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 30, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 20, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 13, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 13, 2003 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 3, 2003 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Mar 11, 2003 | 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 19, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 7, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 3, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 30, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 26, 2002 | 1.BA | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM ADDED | — |
| Nov 26, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 26, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 24, 2002 | 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 21, 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. |
| Feb 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |