USPTO serial 76450808
CAMOPLAST TOUGH TRACK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CORDOVA, RAUL
- 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 CAMOPLAST TOUGH TRACK?
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
Sherbrooke, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Anthony R. Masiello
ANTHONY R MASIELLO HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP2099 PENNSYLVANIA AVE STE 100WASHINGTON, DC 20006-6801UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | Rubber tracks, namely, rubberized plain belts and belts with profiles used in snowmobiles and in land vehicles | 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 22, 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. |
| Oct 21, 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. |
| Mar 10, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 6, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 23, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 29, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 29, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Nov 10, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 28, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 12, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 7, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 3, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 4, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 30, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 9, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 23, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 19, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 19, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 2, 2003 | 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. |
| Mar 18, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |