USPTO serial 76506670
GRADEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HAYES, GINA CLARK
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 GRADEX?
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
Vanier, Quebec, CA
BOISBRIAND, QUEBEC, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark Harrison
MARK HARRISON VENABLEPO BOX 34385WASHINGTON, DC 20043-4385UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | MACHINES FOR CLASSIFICATION OF WOOD | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| May 3, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 12, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 12, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 22, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 30, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 8, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 1, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 26, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 4, 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. |
| Sep 4, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |