USPTO serial 77114040
SR85
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BIDDULPH, HEATHER ANN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - 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 SR85?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert C. Cumbow
ROBERT C. CUMBOW GRAHAM & DUNN PC2801 ALASKAN WAY STE 300 PIER 70SEATTLE, WA 98121-1128UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 004 | Ethanol fuels; Fuel for motor vehicles, namely, ethanol and ethanol blended fuels | 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 31, 2009 | 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 29, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 26, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 9, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 9, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 13, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 13, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 11, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 19, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 19, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 19, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 10, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 10, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 24, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 8, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 8, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 8, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 1, 2007 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |