USPTO serial 77572234
HEI
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OKEKE, BENJAMIN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 HEI?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Pamela S. Burt
PAMELA S. BURT WEINER & BURT, P.C.P.O. BOX 186HARRISVILLE, MI 48740UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Educational services, namely, providing courses of instruction in the field of attaching hair extensions, hair fusion, and hair salon services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Feb 12, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 10, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 13, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 24, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 22, 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 20, 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 17, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 23, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |