USPTO serial 77804320
MINESENTRY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HELLMAN, ELI J
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 MINESENTRY?
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.
Frank Terranella
Frank Terranella ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 THIRD AVENUE10TH FLOORNEW YORK, NY 10017Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer-based and instrument-based monitoring, measuring and detection systems, comprised of video and still cameras, software and computers for the detection and analysis of chemistry, content and physical condition of mines, mining equipment, mineral processing equipment and oil sands processing equipment | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2013 | 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. |
| Sep 20, 2013 | 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. |
| Jul 3, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 22, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 30, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 30, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 5, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 5, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 31, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 31, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 31, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 16, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 6, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 11, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 11, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 5, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 12, 2011 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 22, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 7, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 7, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 12, 2010 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Mar 12, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 11, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 23, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 23, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 23, 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 24, 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. |
| Nov 23, 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 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |