USPTO serial 76574248
DOMINATOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GARTNER, JOHN M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 DOMINATOR?
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
Ayer's Cliff, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
A. Yates Dowell, III
A YATES DOWELL III DOWELL & DOWELL PC2111 EISENHOWER AVE STE 406ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | stretch wrap machines used for pallet wrapping and industrial conveyors and parts therefor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 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. |
| Jul 29, 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. |
| Dec 28, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 26, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 21, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 19, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 19, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 27, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 27, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 20, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |