USPTO serial 76398385
SUNDAY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHHINA, KARANENDRA S
- 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 SUNDAY?
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
New York, NY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Herbert Dubno
HERBERT DUBNO THE FIRM OF KARL F ROSS, PC5676 RIVERDALE AVE BOX 900BRONX, NY 10471-0900UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | CELLULAR TELEPHONES SOLD RETAIL; CELLULAR TELEPHONE ACCESSORIES SOLD RETAIL, NAMELY, FACEPLATES, EAR PIECES, CELLULAR TELEPHONE HOLDERS FOR VEHICLES, CELLULAR TELEPHONE CASES | 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 21, 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. |
| Aug 20, 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. |
| Jan 23, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 22, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 4, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 30, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 18, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 6, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 6, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 26, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 30, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 4, 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. |
| Dec 22, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 28, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 17, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 21, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 7, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 7, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 6, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 17, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 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. |
| Aug 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |