USPTO serial 76521180
E-SCRATCH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BROWN, BARBARA TROFFKIN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 E-SCRATCH?
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
Goods and services
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 30, 2006 | 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 30, 2006 | 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 4, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 3, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 12, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 12, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 20, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 20, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 12, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 5, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 29, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 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. |
| Dec 14, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 21, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |