USPTO serial 77453609
PUREIAN ORGANICS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BUSH, KAREN K
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 PUREIAN ORGANICS?
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.
Grant A. Monachino
Grant A. Monachino McDonald Hopkins LLC600 Superior Avenue, E., Ste. 2100Cleveland, OH 44114UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | canned sparkling water | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 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. |
| Feb 14, 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. |
| Sep 30, 2011 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 19, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 19, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 6, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 6, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 21, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 21, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 17, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 13, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 12, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 8, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 19, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 7, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 7, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 5, 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. |
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Aug 4, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |