USPTO serial 78115233
THE VITALITY PROJECT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MEIER, SHARON A
- Law office
- SCANNING ON DEMAND
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 THE VITALITY PROJECT?
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.
Frank G. Long
STEVEN T LAWRENCE ESQ GALLAGHER & KENNEDY, PA2575 E CAMELBACK RD STE 1100PHOENIX, AZ 85016UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 044 | Medical care, namely, testosterone replacement therapy; cosmetic and plastic surgery; hair restoration procedures; and individualized assessment programs designed to promote health and weight management and to prevent disease | 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 22, 2006 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Mar 21, 2005 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Mar 21, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jan 28, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 20, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 12, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 19, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 18, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 3, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 6, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 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. |
| Jul 12, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |