USPTO serial 77802104
ECO RINK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FINK, GINA M
- 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 ECO RINK?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Monte L. Falcoff/Geoffrey D. Aurini
MONTE L. FALCOFF/GEOFFREY D. AURINI HARNESS, DICKEY & PIERCE, P.L.C.5445 CORPORATE DR STE 200TROY, MI 48098-2683UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | Components of refrigeration systems used in industrial refrigeration markets, namely, ice rinks, namely, chiller, compressor, condenser, thermal equalizer, cooler charger, heat exchanger, water sump tank and pump, heat pumps, microprocessor controls and pipes, all sold as a unit | 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 9, 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. |
| Nov 9, 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. |
| Apr 13, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 8, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 2, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 2, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 2, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 31, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 19, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 18, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 18, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 18, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 13, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 21, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 21, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 21, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 20, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 18, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 18, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 18, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 5, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 12, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 7, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 3, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 9, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 27, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 1, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 28, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 28, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 22, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 16, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 16, 2009 | 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 16, 2009 | 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 16, 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. |
| Nov 16, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |