USPTO serial 77906613
HAMMERALL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GARDNER, DAWNA BERYL
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 HAMMERALL?
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
London, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Timothy J. Sinnott
TIMOTHY J. SINNOTT BERESKIN & PARR LLP/S.E.N.C.R.L., S.R.L.40 KING STREET WEST40TH FLOORTORONTO, ONTARIO, M4H3Y2Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | (Based on Intent to Use) Hand tools, namely, hammers (Based on 44(d) Priority Application) Hand tools, namely, hammers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 11, 2014 | 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. |
| Mar 10, 2014 | 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. |
| Aug 10, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 10, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 10, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 18, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 8, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 7, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 7, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 21, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 9, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 17, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 17, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 3, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 7, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 7, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 7, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 9, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 9, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 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 31, 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 31, 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 31, 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 31, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 14, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |