USPTO serial 78527825
THE GREETING COMPANY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ZAK, HENRY
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 THE GREETING COMPANY?
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.
LORRAINE PINSENT
CALGARY ABC - ALBERTA T2P 4K7LORRAINE PINSENT; BENNETT JONES LLP4500 BANKERS HALL E 855 2ND ST,Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | ADVERTISING SERVICES, NAMELY, PROVIDING ADVERTISING SPACE ON THE INTERNET; DELIVERY OF CALENDAR REMINDERS FOR AND TO OTHERS BY ON-LINE MEANS; DELIVERY OF MESSAGES BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION, NAMELY, COMPUTER-GENERATED TELEPHONY; COMPUTER SERVICES, NAMLEY, PROVIDING CUSTOMIZED PRE-RECORDED MESSAGES VIA THE INTERNET AND TELEPHONE | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 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. |
| Jan 5, 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. |
| Jun 9, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 9, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 9, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 7, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 7, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 7, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 1, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 1, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 15, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 19, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 6, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 12, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 12, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 30, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 30, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 22, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 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. |
| Jul 15, 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. |
| Jul 11, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 15, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |