USPTO serial 76561120
THE IRRIGANT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DELANEY, ZHALEH SYBIL
- 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 THE IRRIGANT?
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.
Barry S. White
BARRY S WHITE FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG LLP745 FIFTH AVENEW YORK, NY 10151UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Oral hygiene products for medical use, namely, mouthwashes, antimicrobials and disinfectants in the nature of oral rinses, antiseptics, and oral solutions used to treat gingivitis, periodontitis, or halitosis | ACTIVE | Jun 9, 2005 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 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. |
| Sep 9, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 9, 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. |
| Feb 10, 2006 | 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 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 5, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 5, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 1, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 28, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 20, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 20, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 15, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Dec 14, 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. |
| Dec 14, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 26, 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. |
| May 20, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 17, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |