USPTO serial 76367783
LOM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EDWARDS, ALICIA COLLINS
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 LOM?
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
Kelowna, British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Ms. Lisa Caldwell
MS LISA CALDWELL KLARQUIST SPARKMAN CAMPBELL LEIGH ET ALONE WORLD TRADE CTR121 S W SALMON ST 16TH FLPORTLAND, OR 97204-2988Goods 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 22, 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 20, 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. |
| Jan 14, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 8, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 17, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 22, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 22, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 28, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 22, 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. |
| May 1, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |