USPTO serial 78422581
BETTER THAN COD LIVER OIL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRENCH, CURTIS W
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 BETTER THAN COD LIVER OIL?
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
Natural Factors Nutritional Products Ltd.
Coquitlam, British Columbia, CA
Other trademarks owned by Natural Factors Nutritional Products Ltd.
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Dietary and nutritional supplements | 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 6, 2014 | 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 6, 2014 | 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. |
| Jul 8, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 8, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 8, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 20, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 7, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 1, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 1, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 1, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 13, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 13, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 6, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 9, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 9, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 9, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 25, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 17, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 14, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 14, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 12, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 12, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 5, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 2, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 1, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 17, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 29, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 18, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 18, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 3, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 22, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 18, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 26, 2007 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 26, 2007 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 26, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 27, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 26, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 22, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 14, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 14, 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 2, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 2, 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. |
| Dec 20, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 27, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |