USPTO serial 77897846
MAYA-300
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ERVIN, INGA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - 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 MAYA-300?
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
Mississauga, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Joanne Gillespie
91 LICHFIELD ROADMARKHAM, ONTARIO, L3R0W9CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | electrochemical cells and batteries for automobiles, powerpacks, battery accessories, namely, chargers | ACTIVE | — |
| 012 | Electrical vehicles, namely, automobiles, hybrid cars, concept vehicles, and integral parts and fittings for all of the aforesaid wares; electric motors and engines for automobiles | ACTIVE | Jun 30, 2009 |
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 29, 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. |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| May 2, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 2, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 2, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 2, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 2, 2012 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 12, 2012 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 22, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 22, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 12, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 23, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 26, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 30, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 30, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 30, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 29, 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. |
| Mar 29, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 29, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 29, 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. |
| Mar 22, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 27, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |