USPTO serial 77692109
VISO RETAINING WALL SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LORENZO, KATHLEEN H
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 VISO RETAINING WALL SYSTEM?
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
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 HERSHKOVITZ PLLC400 7TH ST NW6th FloorWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2218Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 019 | Precast concrete retaining wall blocks and panels | 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 4, 2016 | 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 4, 2016 | 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 5, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 4, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 25, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 24, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 24, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 20, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 19, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 19, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 18, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 17, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 10, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 6, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 2, 2013 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Dec 2, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 2, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 20, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 20, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 20, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 29, 2013 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 28, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 28, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 26, 2012 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 26, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 19, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 19, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 6, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 12, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 10, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 4, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 1, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 1, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 24, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 25, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 14, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 14, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 6, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 5, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 5, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 5, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 27, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 27, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Jun 10, 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. |
| Jun 10, 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. |
| Jun 5, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 19, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 19, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |