USPTO serial 78349883
NEVERILL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELL, MARLENE D
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 NEVERILL?
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.
Jay F. Moldovanyi
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | All natural health food supplements namely health supplements from herbal, animal and fish sources which are in the form of ground or dry product, in solution, or as an extract of herbal, animal or fish sources;; All natural health food supplements namely health supplements from herbal, animal and fish sources which are in the form of ground or dry product, in solution, or as an extract of herbal, animal or fish sources | 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 10, 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. |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| May 1, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 30, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 15, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 11, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 31, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 24, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 10, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 22, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 6, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 14, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |