USPTO serial 76696995
COVERME
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- I, DAVID C
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 COVERME?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CHRISTOPHER H. KOZLOWSKI
CHRISTOPHER H. KOZLOWSKI Kozlowski & Company5065 Forest Hill DriveMississauga, Ontario L5M 5A7,CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Kits consisting of a cape, head cap and two ear covers, for protective use during hair colouring; Kits consisting of a waterproof cape, a waterproof head cap and two waterproof ear covers, for protective use during hair colouring; liquid impermeable caps, liquid impermeable head caps; liquid impermeable ear covers; capes for protective use during hair colouring; shower type caps; and ear covers for protective use during hair colouring | 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 4, 2013 | 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 4, 2013 | 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 6, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 9, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 4, 2012 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 15, 2012 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 15, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 9, 2012 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 9, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 2, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 27, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 27, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 26, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 23, 2010 | MREI | NOTICE OF REINSTATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 16, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 16, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 21, 2010 | RGRR | REINSTATEMENT GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | CEPE | COMBINED EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION ENTERED | — |
| Jul 21, 2009 | CEAP | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 13, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 28, 2009 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |