USPTO serial 76587577
ULTRACABLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- POWERS, ALEXANDER L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 ULTRACABLE?
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
Nepean, Ontario, K2H 7Z1, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | BUILDING WIRE, NAMELY DATA COMMUNICATION WIRE FOR INSTALLATION IN BUILDINGS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2008 | 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 20, 2008 | 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 23, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 23, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 23, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 23, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 23, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 22, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 3, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 3, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 13, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 10, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 10, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 24, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 24, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 3, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 3, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 2, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 18, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 15, 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. |
| Nov 13, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 12, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 10, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |