USPTO serial 78169486
ARIVIA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MILTON, PRISCILLA
- 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 ARIVIA?
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
Salt Lake City,, UT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael E. Mangelson, Esq.
MICHAEL E MANGELSON ESQ STOEL RIVES LLP201 S MAIN STSTE 1100,SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Pharmaceutical preparations for the treatment of prevention of gastrointestinal disorders, infectious diseases, diseases involving varying levels of calcium in cells and outside cells, neurological or other central nervous system disorders, endocrine disorders, and bone metabolism disorders; pharmaceutical preparations for use in effecting analgesia and in pain management | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 15, 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. |
| Feb 15, 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. |
| Jul 12, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Jun 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 25, 2003 | 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 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 26, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 23, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | 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 21, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |