USPTO serial 78449294
IRVING PERSONAL CARE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCBRIDE, THEODORE M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 IRVING PERSONAL CARE?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JOHN A. CLIFFORD
JOHN A CLIFFORD MERCHANT & GOULD PCPO BOX 2910MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-0910UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 2012 | 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. |
| Jul 25, 2012 | 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. |
| Dec 16, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 8, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 7, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 7, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 6, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 6, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 31, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 6, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 3, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 10, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 14, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 26, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 23, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 15, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 15, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 31, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 23, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 17, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 15, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 12, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 12, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 15, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 15, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 29, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 24, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 16, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 1, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 28, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 12, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 11, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 1, 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. |
| Feb 17, 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. |
| Feb 17, 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 15, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 20, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |