USPTO serial 77269895
BIOCHIC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RICHARDS, SUSAN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 BIOCHIC?
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.
Ben D. Tobor
BEN D. TOBOR GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP1000 LOUISIANA ST STE 1800HOUSTON, TX 77002-5018UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Household appliances, namely, electric blenders, electric food mixers, electric knives, electric can openers, electric knife sharpeners, electric coffee grinders, electric bread slicers, juice extractors, electric juicers, clothes washing machines, dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, and electric food processors | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2008 | 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. |
| May 22, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 22, 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. |
| Oct 19, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 27, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 20, 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. |
| Sep 18, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 7, 2007 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Sep 6, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |