USPTO serial 78678301
TOBA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MONINGHOFF, KIM TERESA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 TOBA?
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.
George A. Pelletier, Jr.
George A. Pelletier, Jr. Cantor Colburn LLP20 Church Street, 22d FloorHartford, CT 06103UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Glass, mug or cup containing a brewing chamber having an outlet aperture and a one-way flow aperture allowing the introduction of a fluid into the chamber and adapted to receive a steeping material | 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 25, 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. |
| Aug 24, 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. |
| Jan 26, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 25, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 17, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 2, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 26, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 1, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 26, 2008 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 31, 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. |
| Feb 20, 2007 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 5, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 5, 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. |
| Feb 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 14, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 1, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |