USPTO serial 78593513
BEDRISKA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BROWN, BARBARA TROFFKIN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 BEDRISKA?
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
Vancouver, British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Susan Upton Douglass
SUSAN UPTON DOUGLASS FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU PC866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017-1822UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | wines | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 3, 2008 | 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 7, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 7, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 7, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 7, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 6, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 5, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 5, 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. |
| May 14, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 3, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 3, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 17, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 29, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |