USPTO serial 78607869
MAX Q
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HOFFMAN, DAVID AARON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 MAX Q?
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.
Maria v. Hardison
MARIA V HARDISON TASSAN & HARDISON4143 27TH ST NARLINGTON, VA 22207-5211UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | Non-alcoholic, non-carbonated, fruit-flavored beverages | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 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. |
| Aug 31, 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. |
| Jan 20, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 15, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 14, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 14, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 3, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 3, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 5, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 19, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 19, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 9, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 30, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 30, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 30, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 9, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 9, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 14, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 15, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 24, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 24, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 9, 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. |
| Nov 17, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 12, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 12, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 10, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 3, 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. |
| Nov 10, 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. |
| Nov 10, 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. |
| Nov 10, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 20, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |