USPTO serial 76509960
MIDWEST COMMUNITY BANK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PARADEWELAI, BENJI YUEN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 MIDWEST COMMUNITY BANK?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert D. Crangle
ROBERT D CRANGLE117 N 4TH ST PO BOX 285LINCOLN, KS 67455-0285UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | BANKING SERVICES; INSURANCE AGENCY; INSURANCE CONSULTING | 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, 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. |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Apr 10, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 22, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 15, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 15, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 24, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 29, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 29, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 18, 2005 | FAXX | FAX SENT | — |
| Feb 27, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 27, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 12, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 12, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 8, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 5, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 18, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 21, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 26, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 26, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 16, 2004 | FAXX | FAX SENT | — |
| Apr 16, 2004 | 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 7, 2003 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 25, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |