USPTO serial 76492943
GUARD
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 GUARD?
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
Lachine, Quebec H8T 3C8, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John H. Weber
JOHN H WEBER BAKER & HOSTETLER LLPWASHINGTON SQ STE 11001050 CONNECTICUT AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20036Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | padlocks, armored padlocks, padlock accessories, keying pins, patio door locks, discus padlocks, locks, combination locks, rim locks, chains, chain locks, cable locks, keyed and non-keyed cylinders, interchangeable core cylinders, key tags, key accessories, mortise locks, window locks, bicycle locks, motorcycle locks, u locks, keys and key blanks, key cabinets, door bars, steering wheel locks, gun locks, luggage locks | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| May 10, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| May 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 13, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 6, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 6, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 2, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 11, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 11, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 11, 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. |
| Aug 14, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |