USPTO serial 77802945
RMYSTIQUE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LIWINSKI, HELENE AGNES
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - 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 RMYSTIQUE?
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
Montreal, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael J. Bevilacqua, Esquire
MICHAEL J. BEVILACQUA, ESQUIRE WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE AND DORR LLP60 STATE ST STE 25BOSTON, MA 02109-1816UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | ladies outerwear, namely, coats, jackets; ladies wear and accessories, namely, jackets, skirts, pants, blouses, tops, gloves, hats, scarves and belts | 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 5, 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. |
| Oct 5, 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. |
| Mar 9, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 13, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 6, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 9, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 9, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 9, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 9, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 9, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 9, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 11, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 20, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 15, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 5, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 5, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 29, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 2, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 1, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 24, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 24, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 17, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 1, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 29, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 29, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 29, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 17, 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. |
| Nov 17, 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 17, 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 17, 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 17, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 18, 2009 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 15, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |