USPTO serial 77111044
FREEDOM WATER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHANG, KATHERINE S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 FREEDOM WATER?
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.
BRETT LOVEJOY, ESQ.
BRETT LOVEJOY, ESQ. JONES DAY222 E 41ST STNEW YORK, NY 10017-6702UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | water extraction systems used in extracting potable water from air; water purification systems, namely, water purification tanks, water purification units, and water purifying apparatus; and elements, namely, parts and fittings for water extraction and water purification systems | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Nov 30, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 30, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 26, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 26, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 26, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 26, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 26, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 3, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 3, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 3, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 3, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 3, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 9, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 9, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 9, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 9, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 9, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 8, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 15, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 9, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 9, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 9, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 7, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Jun 7, 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. |
| Jun 7, 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. |
| Jun 7, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 23, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |