USPTO serial 78045694
MERLIN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KON, ELISSA GARBER
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 MERLIN?
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
Microtec Security Inc./Microtec Sécurité Inc.
Ottawa, CA
Other trademarks owned by Microtec Security Inc./Microtec Sécurité Inc.
CALGARY, ALBERTA, CA
Montreal (Quebec), CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
EDWARD LANE
Edward Lane Protections Equinox1500, Du College, suite 410St. Laurent (Quebec), H4L 5G6CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | SECURITY SYSTEMS FOR RESIDENCES AND INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | RETAIL SALE OF SECURITY SYSTEMS AGAINST THEFT, NAMELY, FOR RESIDENTIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS THROUGH RETAIL STORES, COMPUTERIZED ON-LINE RETAIL SERVICES, ON-LINE ORDERING AND CATALOGUES, MAIL ORDER SERVICES FEATURING CATALOGUES AND ORDERING BY MAIL AND TELEPHONE, WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTORSHIP SERVICES | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Microtec Security Inc./Microtec Sécurité Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by FIRST NATIONAL ALARMCAP LP
- Other trademarks owned by 9150-5115 QUEBEC INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Similar marks named MERLIN
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2007 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2007 | 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 29, 2007 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| May 29, 2007 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| May 25, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 27, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 27, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 8, 2006 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 12, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 12, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 17, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 21, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 21, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 26, 2005 | 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 26, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 19, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 11, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 30, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 14, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 9, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 8, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 25, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2002 | 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. |
| Dec 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 30, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 12, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |