USPTO serial 78560840
CARVIO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAVACHE, ROBERT JAMES
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 CARVIO?
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.
MORTON J. ROSENBERG
MORTON J ROSENBERG ROSENBERG, KLEIN & LEE3458 ELLICOTT CTR DR STE 101ELLICOTT CITY, MD 21043-4178UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | VIDEO SCREENS; VIDEO GAME MACHINES FOR USE WITH TELEVISIONS, AUDIO-VIDEO RECEIVERS; JUKE BOXES FOR PLAYING MUSIC; DVD PLAYERS; MP3 PLAYERS; ELECTRIC AND ELECTRONIC VIDEO SURVEILLANCE INSTALLATIONS; COMPUTER MONITORS;COMPUTER GAME APPARATUS, NAMELY, COMPUTER GAME JOYSTICKS, CARTRIDGES, AND DISCS; CATHODE RAY TUBES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 16, 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. |
| Oct 16, 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. |
| Mar 20, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 15, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 8, 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. |
| Sep 8, 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. |
| Sep 1, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 14, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |