USPTO serial 77104117
32 WHITE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FIRST, VIVIAN M
- 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 32 WHITE?
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.
Robert L. Powley
ROBERT L. POWLEY POWLEY & GIBSON, P.C.304 HUDSON STREET2ND FLOORNEW YORK, NY 10013-1027Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | Teeth whitening products, namely, whitening pastes, whitening gels, whitening strips, whitening rinses, whitening gum, whitening mints, whitening polishes, whitening pens, whitening dental trays and whitening sticks | ACTIVE | — |
| 044 | The operation of dental and whitening clinics; providing advice and consultation services related to dental whitening | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 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 22, 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 24, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 24, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 22, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 17, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 29, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 20, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 15, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 15, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 15, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 15, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 15, 2007 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| May 30, 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. |
| May 30, 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. |
| May 30, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |