USPTO serial 78233493
ADVANTASE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHOSHO II, ERNEST
- 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 ADVANTASE?
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.
Arlana S. Cohen
ARLANA S COHENST ONGE STEWARD JOHNSTON & REENS LLC986 BEDFORD STSTAMFORD CT, 06905 5619Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ENZYMES FOR PROCESSING OF STARCH, CELLULOSE, WASTE, WATER AND DETERGENTS; ENZYMES FOR PROCESSING OF STARCH, CELLULOSE, WASTE, WATER AND DETERGENTS | 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 28, 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. |
| Feb 28, 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. |
| Aug 2, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 22, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 27, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 8, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |