USPTO serial 78096357
SPORTNECKS BY GILDAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PERRY, KIMBERLY B
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 SPORTNECKS BY GILDAN?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lynn S. Cassan
LYNN S CASSAN CASSAN MACLEAN80 ABERDEEN ST STE 401OTTAWA, ON K1S 5R5CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | CLOTHING, NAMELY, T-SHIRTS, SPORT SHIRTS, KNIT TOPS, SWEATSHIRTS, JOGGING PANTS, JOGGING SUITS, SHORTS, TURTLENECKS, SWEATPANTS, TANK TOPS, TRIM-EDGE COLLAR SHIRTS, GOLF SHIRTS, SOCKS AND UNDERWEAR | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2004 | 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 19, 2004 | 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. |
| Apr 20, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 3, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 2003 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 19, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 12, 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. |
| Mar 5, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |