USPTO serial 76604004
SIMCOE SPRINGS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WELLS, KELLEY L
- 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 SIMCOE SPRINGS?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Neal L. Slifkin
NEAL L SLIFKIN HARRIS BEACH LLP99 GAMSEY RDPITTSFORD, NY 14534UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | non-alcoholic beverages, namely, bottled drinking water | ABANDONED | — |
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 31, 2006 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Jul 31, 2006 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Jul 31, 2006 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jul 31, 2006 | OP.S | OPPOSITION SUSTAINED NO. 999999 | — |
| May 16, 2006 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 7, 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. |
| Jan 18, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 23, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 16, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 12, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Dec 12, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 12, 2005 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 12, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Mar 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. |
| Feb 28, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 5, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |