USPTO serial 76387604
GOLFPRINT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STEPHENS, SONYA B
- 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 GOLFPRINT?
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
Montreal, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
AMY E. CARROLL
AMY E CARROLL DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP1500 K ST NW STE 1100WASHINGTON, DC 20005-1209UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | PHYSICAL FITNESS CONSULTATION SERVICES, NAMELY, PROVIDING CONSULTATION RELATING TO GOLF POSTURAL PROFILES AND GOLF PERFORMANCE ANALYSES, INCLUDING CREATION OF PERSONALIZED POSTURAL PROFILES AND PROVISION OF GOLF PERFORMANCE ANALYSES IN REPORT FORM | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 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. |
| Oct 13, 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. |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 16, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 17, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 13, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 22, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 18, 2003 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 18, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 13, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 12, 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. |
| Jul 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 12, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |