USPTO serial 76364863
J JAY PROTECTOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MANDIR, FREDERICK
- 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 J JAY PROTECTOR?
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
OAKVILLE, ONTARIO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
INGRID E. SCHMIDT
INGRID E SCHMIDT GOWLING LAFLEUR HENDERSON LLPSTE 560-120 KING ST WP O BOX 1045, LCD1HAMILTON, ON L8N 3R4Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | ORTHOPEDIC METATARSAL TOE PROTECTOR FOR FOOTWEAR | 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 30, 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 30, 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 4, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 4, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 4, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 2, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 9, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 20, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 13, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 4, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 4, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 30, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 31, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 4, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 4, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 9, 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. |
| Apr 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |