USPTO serial 78515977
Serial No. 78515977
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KOVALSKY, LAURA G
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 Serial No. 78515977?
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.
Gary D. Krugman
GARY D KRUGMAN SUGHRUE MION PLLC2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW STE 800WASHINGTON, DC 20037-3213UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | motor vehicles, namely automobiles, sport utility vehicles, trucks, and structural parts therefor | ACTIVE | Aug 10, 2001 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 17, 2009 | 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 25, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 19, 2008 | GNS1 | NOTIFICATION OF SUBSEQUENT FINAL EMAILED | — |
| Nov 19, 2008 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 19, 2008 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 6, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 5, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 5, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 29, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 19, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 11, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 11, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 11, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 25, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 25, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 18, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 4, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 4, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 8, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 6, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Feb 6, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Dec 29, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 16, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 22, 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. |
| Jun 22, 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. |
| Jun 17, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 17, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |