USPTO serial 77553589
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Todd A. Rattray
TODD A. RATTRAY OYEN WIGGS GREEN & MUTALA LLP601 WEST CORDOVA STREET480-THE STATIONVANCOUVER; BRITISH COLUMB, V6B1G1| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | energy conversion devices for converting mechanical energy into electrical energy | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2013 | 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 3, 2013 | 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 7, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 30, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 24, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 24, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 24, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 27, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 27, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 24, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 6, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 29, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 5, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 5, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 28, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 3, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 9, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 9, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 9, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 27, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 14, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 14, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 14, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 23, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 23, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 22, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 13, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 13, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 13, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 27, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Aug 26, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |