USPTO serial 76353630
VISCOOL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TURNER, JASON FITZGERALD
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 VISCOOL?
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.
Karl Hormann, Esq.
KARL HORMANN ESQ LAW OFFICE OF KARL HORMANN86 SPARKS STCAMBRIDGE, MA 02138-2216UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Articles of clothing, namely skirts, tops, dresses, hosiery, corsetry, shoes | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 11, 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. |
| Aug 11, 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. |
| Dec 20, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Dec 17, 2004 | CNFR | SU - 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. |
| Oct 21, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 21, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | 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 27, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 15, 2003 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Dec 15, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 1, 2003 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2003 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 1, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 24, 2003 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jul 7, 2003 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 7, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 7, 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. |
| Oct 15, 2002 | 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. |
| Sep 25, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 12, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 14, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 28, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |