USPTO serial 78888020
VIL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUBRAY, KATHERINE M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 VIL?
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
Veterinary Innovations Limited
Stamford, Lincolnshire, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Duane M. Byers
DUANE M BYERS NIXON & VANDERHYE PC901 N GLEBE RD STE 1100ARLINGTON, VA 22203-1854UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Veterinary joint prostheses for surgical implantation, distractor devices for veterinary use, distractor devices for human use | ACTIVE | — |
| 044 | Medical and veterinary services including fitting prostheses and/or distractor devices; maneuvering and stabilizing fractured bones and/or limbs, using any veterinary or medical apparatus or instruments or parts therefor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 21, 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. |
| Jul 21, 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. |
| Dec 20, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 5, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 22, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 22, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 23, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 23, 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. |
| Oct 23, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 27, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| May 26, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |