USPTO serial 77599653
THE BETTER CHOICE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- POWELL, LINDA
- 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 THE BETTER CHOICE?
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.
Scott S. Havlick
SCOTT S. HAVLICK HOLLAND & HART LLPPO BOX 8749DENVER, CO 80201-8749UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Pre-recorded media, namely, pre-recorded DVDs and CDs, featuring presentations in the field of environmental and social responsibility | ACTIVE | — |
| 016 | Printed materials, namely, newsletters, pamphlets, brochures, and a series of books, all in the field of environmental and social responsibility | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | Providing commercial information in the fields of environmentally and socially responsible companies and their products via an interactive website with links to those companies and via online newsletters in the field of environmentally and socially responsible technologies; business networking and promotion of environmentally and socially responsible technologies among industry peers and other organizations | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 3, 2014 | 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. |
| Jan 3, 2014 | 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. |
| Jun 3, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 3, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 3, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 31, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 22, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 16, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 16, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 15, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 22, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 17, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 17, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 10, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 7, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 7, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 22, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 29, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 27, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 19, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 29, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 29, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 4, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 2, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 2, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 2, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 12, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 12, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 27, 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. |
| Jan 28, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 28, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 28, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 28, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |