USPTO serial 78562185
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
Vancouver, B.C. V6Z 2E9, CA
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Howard F Mandelbaum
Howard F Mandelbaum Levine & Mandelbaum222 Bloomingdale RoadSuite 203White Plains, NY 10605| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | wearing apparel, namely, tank tops, t-shirts, foundation garments, lingerie, jeans and underwear; bags and purses, namely, hand bags, purses, school bags and knapsacks; wallets | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 12, 2010 | 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 9, 2010 | 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 9, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 8, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 5, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 5, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 3, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 9, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 9, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 23, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 11, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 27, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 10, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 3, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 29, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 31, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 31, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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 9, 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 3, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |