USPTO serial 78232617
MATREGEN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FAIRBANKS, RONALD L
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 MATREGEN?
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.
Sabrina C. Stavish
SABRINA C STAVISH SHERIDAN ROSS PC1560 BROADWAY STE 1200DENVER, CO 80202UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BIOMATERIALS AND MICROTUBULES FOR BIOMEDICAL, MEDICAL, PHARMACEUTICAL OR AGRICULTURAL APPLICATIONS | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA OF BIOTECHNOLOGY, BIOMATERIALS AND MICROTUBULARS FOR BIOMEDICAL, MEDICAL, PHARMACEUTICAL AND AGRICULTURAL APPLICATIONS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 28, 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. |
| Jul 25, 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. |
| Dec 6, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 17, 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. |
| Dec 16, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 26, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 23, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 31, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 21, 2005 | 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 28, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 23, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 14, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Sep 8, 2003 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Aug 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |