USPTO serial 77039808
ACTION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINKER, ANTHONY MICHAEL
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 ACTION?
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
Salt Lake City, UT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lester K. Essig
LESTER K ESSIG RAY QUINNEY & NEBEKER PC36 S STATE ST STE 1400SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111-1451UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Laundry detergents, liquid laundry detergents, powdered laundry detergents, dish detergents, liquid dish detergents, powdered dish detergents, liquid automatic dish detergents, powdered automatic dish detergents, fabric softeners, liquid fabric softeners, sheet fabric softeners, bleach, liquid bleach, dry bleach, chlorine bleach, non-chlorine bleach, liquid chlorine bleach, dry non-chlorine bleach, oxygen bleach, and all purpose cleaners | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2007 | 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 13, 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. |
| Mar 8, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 14, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |