USPTO serial 77326079
GO GREEN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAWRENCE, SUSAN KASTRINER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 GO GREEN?
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.
Christopher N. Hunter
Christopher N. Hunter Norton Rose Canada LLP200 Bay Street, Suite 3800Royal Bank Plaza, South TowerToronto, ON, M5J2Z4Goods and services
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 28, 2014 | 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 28, 2014 | 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 8, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 30, 2013 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2013 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 30, 2013 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 4, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 26, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 22, 2013 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 11, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 23, 2012 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Oct 23, 2012 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 9, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 9, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 9, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 13, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 13, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2012 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 26, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 25, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 25, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 8, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 25, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 25, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 25, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 25, 2011 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 25, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 23, 2011 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 18, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 14, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 14, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 14, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 11, 2010 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 12, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 5, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 5, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 5, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 13, 2009 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 10, 2009 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Nov 6, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 6, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 25, 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. |
| Sep 25, 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. |
| Feb 28, 2008 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Feb 28, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 15, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |