USPTO serial 76485451
NEURO-NUTRITION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BUSH, KAREN K
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 NEURO-NUTRITION?
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
Matol Biotech Laboratories Ltd.
Pointe Claire, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark B. Harrison
MARK B HARRISON VENABLEPO BOX 34385WASHINGTON, DC 20043-9998UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | PROTEIN BARS AND SHAKES; DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS, NAMELY HERBAL DROPS AND NEUROCEUTICALS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2007 | 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 30, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 21, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 25, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 4, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 23, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 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 31, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |