USPTO serial 77728895
GREEN-SMART TECHNOLOGY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GOLD, BARBARA
- 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 GREEN-SMART TECHNOLOGY?
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.
Holiday W. Banta
HOLIDAY W. BANTA WOODARD, EMHARDT, MORIARTY, MCNETT & HENRY LLP111 MONUMENT CIR STE 3700INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46204-5107UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Combination herbicide and fertilizer preparation; combination herbicide and organic fertilizer preparation | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 7, 2011 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2011 | 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. |
| Nov 6, 2010 | 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. |
| Nov 6, 2010 | 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. |
| Nov 6, 2010 | 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. |
| Oct 21, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 19, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 30, 2010 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 22, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jan 6, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 14, 2009 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 14, 2009 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 19, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 19, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 19, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 30, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 30, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 30, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 8, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |