USPTO serial 77817672
MAXCUT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CALLAGHAN, BRIAN P
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 MAXCUT?
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.
Ann Carlsen
Ann Carlsen Ann Carlsen and CompanySte 501, 3292 Production WayBurnaby, BC, V5A4R4CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Industrial metal cutting machines, industrial lathes and industrial milling machines, all limited to heavy industrial use | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 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. |
| Jun 10, 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. |
| Nov 12, 2012 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2012 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Nov 12, 2012 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 12, 2012 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 12, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 1, 2012 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 1, 2012 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 30, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 30, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 30, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 7, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 24, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 5, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 5, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 25, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 2, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 13, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 19, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 9, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 9, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 7, 2010 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 7, 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. |
| Dec 7, 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. |
| Dec 7, 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. |
| Dec 4, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 9, 2009 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |