USPTO serial 77557779
ARCHITEXTURES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TENG, SIMON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 ARCHITEXTURES?
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
Thornhill, Ontario, CA
Thornhill, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
HARVEY B. JACOBSON, JR.
HARVEY B. JACOBSON, JR. JACOBSON HOLMAN PLLC400 7TH ST NW STE 600WASHINGTON, DC 20004-2218UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | non-metal building materials for exterior use, namely, manufactured concrete blocks, bricks, non-metal door parts for buildings, namely, paneling boards, wet cast concrete; wood, stone, marble and granite to be used as a decorative facing or veneer on buildings and other structures | 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 19, 2010 | 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 19, 2010 | 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 21, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 31, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 31, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 30, 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 8, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 5, 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 5, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 3, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Sep 2, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |