USPTO serial 76395976
BIRD BARRIER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STINE, DAVID
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 BIRD BARRIER?
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.
Daniel M. Cislo, Esq.
ROBERT W DICKERSON JONES DAY555 S FLOWER ST FIFTIETH FLLOS ANGELES, CA 90071UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | pest control devices, namely non-electric, metal wires attached to a structure for deterring birds from landing or perching, such as a wire coil or a plurality of non-spike protrusions extending laterally from a central hub, and not including a spiked metal product in which numerous metal spikes extend upwardly and outwardly from an elongate base | ACTIVE | Jun 30, 1998 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 6, 2007 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Sep 6, 2007 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Sep 6, 2007 | CNFR | 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. |
| Sep 4, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 6, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 30, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 24, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 22, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 8, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 1, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 27, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 26, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 28, 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. |
| Jul 27, 2005 | CNRT | 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. |
| Jan 21, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 14, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 6, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 15, 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. |
| Oct 1, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |