USPTO serial 77361844
QUIK-FOLD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ELTON, DAVID JONATHAN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 QUIK-FOLD?
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.
Cheryl S. Scotney
Cheryl S. Scotney Standley Law Group LLP6300 Riverside DriveDublin, OH 43017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | Structural parts for automobiles, namely, bumpers, guards and shields for protecting automobiles, namely, trucks, vans, cars, semi-trailer units | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| May 25, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 25, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 25, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 6, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 6, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 16, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 16, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 12, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 21, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 18, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 11, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 11, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 27, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 27, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 19, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 27, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 27, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 27, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 10, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 10, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 10, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 27, 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. |
| Mar 27, 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. |
| Mar 27, 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. |
| Mar 25, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 5, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |