USPTO serial 78243955
JET TRUCK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WOOD, CAROLINE
- 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 JET TRUCK?
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
Co. Durham, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert J. Rose
ROBERT J ROSE SHELDON & MAK PC225 S LK AVE 9TH FLPASADENA, CA 91101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | Amphibious vehicles for locomotion and parts and fittings therefore | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 12, 2008 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Apr 17, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 3, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 10, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 10, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 16, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 12, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 12, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 12, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 19, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 1, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 7, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 11, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 4, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 22, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 10, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 10, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 6, 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. |
| Oct 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 11, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 11, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |