USPTO serial 77859256
SHE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NEVILLE, BRIAN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 SHE?
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.
Alexander H. Butterman and John C. Garvey
ALEXANDER H. BUTTERMAN AND JOHN C. GARVEY STAAS & HALSEY LLP1201 NEW YORK AVE NW FL 7WASHINGTON, DC 20005-3917UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Glucose spray composition for absorption across oral membranes for raising blood glucose level, energy level and/or weight management; energy sprays, for use as nutritional or food supplements; nutritional and food supplements in the form of gels and bars | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 8, 2016 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2016 | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2015 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 13, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 3, 2014 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 6, 2014 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 6, 2014 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 2014 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 10, 2014 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2014 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 8, 2013 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 7, 2012 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 28, 2012 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 19, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 16, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 16, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 12, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 12, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 3, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 3, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 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. |
| Feb 4, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 4, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 2, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |