USPTO serial 78569526
VEGAS HEAT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLANDU, FLORENTINA
- 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 VEGAS HEAT?
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.
Clifford W. Vermette
Clifford W. Vermette Vermette & Co.Suite 320-1177 West Hastings StreetVancouver, V6E 2K3CANADAGoods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 11, 2011 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2011 | 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. |
| Aug 29, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 20, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 20, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 11, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 20, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 20, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 20, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 31, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 31, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 19, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 18, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 22, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 22, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 4, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 12, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 8, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 8, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 8, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 5, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 28, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 28, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 5, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 16, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 16, 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. |
| Sep 16, 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. |
| Sep 16, 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 14, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 1, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |