USPTO serial 77777410
BUD POTENTIATOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KON, ELISSA GARBER
- 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 BUD POTENTIATOR?
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
Abbotsford, BC, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Karl E. Gustafson
KARL E. GUSTAFSON MCMILLAN LLP1500-1055 West Georgia StreetPO Box 11117, Royal CentreVancouver, BC, V6E4N7Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | Fertilizers; soil additives; plant nutrient preparations | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2018 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 12, 2017 | 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. |
| Apr 12, 2017 | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2016 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 13, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 8, 2016 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 7, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 1, 2015 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 31, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 31, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 27, 2015 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 26, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 26, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 20, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 10, 2015 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 9, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 3, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 29, 2014 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 28, 2014 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 24, 2013 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 19, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 19, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 16, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 8, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 3, 2013 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 2, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 2, 2013 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 2, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 25, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 25, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 21, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 20, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 19, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 18, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 18, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 12, 2012 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 12, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 11, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 11, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 21, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 17, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 17, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 16, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 16, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 3, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 3, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 2, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 2, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 2, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 2, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 2, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 2, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 1, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 17, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 7, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 3, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 3, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 30, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 23, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 20, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 20, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 17, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 11, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 10, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 6, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 19, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 15, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 15, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 15, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | 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. |
| Oct 8, 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. |
| Oct 8, 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. |
| Oct 7, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 13, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jul 13, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |