USPTO serial 77669913
ECOTOPIA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ESTRADA, LINDA M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - 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 ECOTOPIA?
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.
Susan Upton Douglass
SUSAN UPTON DOUGLASS FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU, P.C.866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017-1822UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | (Based on 44(d) Fruit-based food beverage; milk based beverages containing fruit juice; milk-based beverage containing coffee; milk-based beverages containing milk concentrates, vegetable oil and added nutrients; (Based on Intent to Use) soy-based food beverage used as a milk substitute | ACTIVE | — |
| 032 | (Based on 44(d) Beer; non-alcoholic beverages, namely, non-alcoholic beer, drinking water and energy drinks | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 16, 2015 | 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. |
| Jul 16, 2015 | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 18, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 10, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 10, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 10, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 25, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 25, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 14, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 28, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 28, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 28, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 8, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 8, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 19, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 19, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 13, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 19, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 4, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 7, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 7, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 26, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 6, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 16, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 16, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 10, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 21, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 20, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 9, 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. |
| May 6, 2009 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 6, 2009 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 6, 2009 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 5, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 19, 2009 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Feb 17, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |