USPTO serial 76540753
RAVEN RANGE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KHOURI, SANI PHILIPPE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 RAVEN RANGE?
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
BURNABY, BRITISH COLUMBIA, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Sandra Wright
SANDRA WRIGHT RICHARDS BUELL SUTTONSTE 700 401 W GEORGIA STVANCOUVER, BC V6B 5A1CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Refrigerated cabinets for food; electric griddles and hotplates; refrigerated merchandise display cases; wok ranges; cheese melters in the nature of a broiler; finishing ovens; deep fryers; broilers; electric storage cabinets used to control temperature and humidity for heating and proofing food goods; electric hot food tables; induction ovens; commercial cooking ovens; exhaust hoods for kitchens; electric and gas ranges; barbeques; electric steam kettles; electric skillets; electric food warmers; ice making machines; kitchen sinks; electric and gas food steamers | ACTIVE | Jul 11, 2003 |
| 021 | Non-electric griddles and hotplates; non-electric kettles; skillets; equipment stands for pots, pans, dishes and kitchen utensils | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 29, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 29, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 31, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 10, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 20, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 19, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 19, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 3, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 17, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 17, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 17, 2007 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 14, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 14, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 13, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 22, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| May 11, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 10, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 20, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 20, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 11, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 3, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 2, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 5, 2004 | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |