USPTO serial 78216040
BLUE SKY SALES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHANG, KATHERINE S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 BLUE SKY SALES?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Thomas A. Dirksen
Thomas A. Dirksen Thomas A. Dirksen, Attorney at Law4607 Lakeview Canyon Road, Suite 117Westlake Village, CA 91361UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Wholesale ordering services, order fulfillment services, and marketing and promotion services for others in the field of processed almonds. | ACTIVE | Jun 1, 1996 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2008 | 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 12, 2008 | 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 14, 2008 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2008 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 30, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 29, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 29, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 29, 2008 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jan 29, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Oct 11, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 3, 2007 | 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. |
| May 3, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 3, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 12, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 12, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 10, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 9, 2007 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 16, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Mar 16, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 16, 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. |
| Jan 13, 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. |
| Jun 14, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 14, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 13, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 8, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 12, 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. |
| Aug 12, 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. |
| Jan 14, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Dec 15, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 15, 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. |
| Oct 15, 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. |
| Feb 17, 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. |
| Dec 1, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 1, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jul 30, 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. |
| Jul 24, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |