USPTO serial 78468636
QUIC-KIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SOBRAL, CHRISTINA
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 QUIC-KIT?
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.
Mark G. Kachigian
MARK G KACHIGIAN HEAD, JOHNSON & KACHIGIAN228 W 17TH PLTULSA, OK 74119-4608UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Individual metal replacement parts for bridge cranes, namely,sheaves, bearings, bushings, hooks, pulleys and wheels, sold together as a unit | ACTIVE | Nov 8, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 13, 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. |
| Aug 13, 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. |
| Jan 12, 2007 | 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 12, 2007 | 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 8, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 19, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 3, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 26, 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. |
| Mar 26, 2005 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Mar 26, 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. |
| Mar 19, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 25, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |