USPTO serial 76556062
PROJECT PRO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BALDWIN, SCOTT
- Law office
- TTAB
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 PROJECT PRO?
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
Eau Claire, WI
Eau Claire, WI
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Danielle I. Mattessich
ERNEST GRUMBLES MERCHANT & GOULD P.C.P.O. BOX 2910MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-9944UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 006 | Metal hardware, namely, nuts, bolts, screws, rivets, grommets, brackets, locks, picture hangers, chains, cables, hooks, and links available exclusively through MENARDS home improvement retail stores | ABANDONED | Jun 21, 2003 |
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 7, 2007 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Dec 7, 2007 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Dec 7, 2007 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 29, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 3, 2007 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jan 3, 2007 | OPPF | OPPOSITION PAPERS RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Nov 15, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 30, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 8, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 16, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 16, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 21, 2005 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2005 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 13, 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. |
| Jun 13, 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. |
| Nov 13, 2004 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Nov 13, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 29, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 17, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 17, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 20, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 11, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 19, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |