USPTO serial 77004465
BIZOUX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GOODMAN, WENDY BETH
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 BIZOUX?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Amy S. Ashworth
AMY S ASHWORTH LEADING-EDGE LAW GROUP PLCTHREE JAMES CTR 1051 E CARY ST STE 1130RICHMOND, VA 23219UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 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. |
| Dec 9, 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. |
| May 13, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 28, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 25, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 25, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 26, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 26, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 26, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 11, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | 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 11, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 28, 2006 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |