USPTO serial 77768460
COOLINEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEE, DEBRA ANN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 COOLINEX?
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.
Owner
E.F. Appliances Canada Limited
Richmond Hill, ONTARIO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Valerie G. Edward
VALERIE G. EDWARD BALLAGH & EDWARD LLP175 LONGWOOD ROAD S,SUITE 102HAMILTON, L8P0A1Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | (Based on Intent to Use) Electric toaster ovens; Electric toasters(Based on 44(d) Priority Application) Electric toaster ovens; Electric toasters | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Apr 20, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 18, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 24, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 24, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 24, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 20, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 23, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 23, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 30, 2009 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |