USPTO serial 77616078
SIMPLY PET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARLYLE, SHAUNIA P
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 SIMPLY PET?
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.
Eric S. Hyman
ERIC S. HYMAN BLAKELY, SOKOLOFF, TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP12400 WILSHIRE BOULEVARDSEVENTH FLOORLOS ANGELES, CA 90025Goods and services
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.
- Other trademarks owned by Interpro Manufacturing Limited
- Other trademarks owned by Interpro Manufacturing Limited
- Other trademarks in Class 019
- Other trademarks in Class 021
- Similar marks named SIMPLY PET
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 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. |
| Jan 26, 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. |
| Jun 20, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 19, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 19, 2012 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| May 24, 2012 | LOPT | LETTER OF PROTEST EVIDENCE FORWARDED | — |
| May 24, 2012 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 26, 2012 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 27, 2012 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Mar 7, 2012 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 21, 2012 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 17, 2012 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 25, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 21, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 20, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 20, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 19, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 17, 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. |
| Feb 14, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 20, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |