USPTO serial 78048822
ZEN BRANDING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NADELMAN, ANDREA KOYNER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 ZEN BRANDING?
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.
Owner
Solana Beach, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Advertising services, namely creating corporate and brand identity for others and business consulting services in the field of marketing, namely, strategic planning and brand development | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 2, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 2, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 16, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 16, 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. |
| May 16, 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. |
| Oct 12, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 11, 2004 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 30, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 9, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 9, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 22, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 17, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 19, 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. |
| Jul 5, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |