USPTO serial 78352054
CARDIO CANINE.COM THE BEST HUMAN HARNESS & DOG LEASH SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LE, KHANH M
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 CARDIO CANINE.COM THE BEST HUMAN HARNESS & DOG LEASH SYSTEM?
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.
Michael A. SIavin
MICHAEL A SIAVIN MCHALE & SLAVIN PA2855 PGA BLVDPALM BEACH GARDENS, FL 33410UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 018 | DOG LEASHES WHICH ATTACH TO A PERSON'S WAIST | ACTIVE | Apr 25, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 2010 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jun 3, 2009 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 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. |
| Oct 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. |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Mar 8, 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. |
| Feb 16, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 31, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 31, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 5, 2004 | 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 5, 2004 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Aug 5, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 5, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 10, 2004 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 2, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| May 2, 2004 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 21, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |