USPTO serial 76697662
ARCTICFOAM PRODUCTS KEEPING THE COLD WHERE IT BELONGS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KELLY, JOHN M
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 ARCTICFOAM PRODUCTS KEEPING THE COLD WHERE IT BELONGS?
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
Cambridge, Ontario N3H 5K4, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Gary L. Shaffer
901 BANKS PLALEXANDRIA, VA 22312-5507UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | SERVICES TO SEAL WELLS AND BOREHOLES DURING THE DRILLING PROCESS; CONSULTING SERVICES REGARDING THE USE OF FOAMS IN WELL DRILLING AND SEALING | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 30, 2012 | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2012 | 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 2, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 22, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 20, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 25, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 25, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 2011 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| May 20, 2011 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 20, 2011 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 23, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 23, 2011 | 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. |
| Aug 16, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 16, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 16, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 14, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 14, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 14, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 7, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 11, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 9, 2009 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jun 4, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |