USPTO serial 85012756
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
Markham, Ontario, CA
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Terrence J. McAllister
TERRENCE J. MCALLISTER OHLANDT, GREELEY, RUGGIERO & PERLE, LLP1 LANDMARK SQ FL 10STAMFORD, CT 06901-2619UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 022 | Fibres, namely, yarn fibers, textile fibers, polyester fibers, and cotton fibers | ACTIVE | — |
| 023 | Yarn | ACTIVE | — |
| 024 | Textiles, namely, textile fabrics for use in making clothing and household furnishings, bed and table linen of textile, textile wall hangings, towels, handkerchiefs of textile; textiles, namely, fabric window covering and treatments, namely, curtains, draperies, sheers, swags, and valences | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 25, 2014 | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2014 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 30, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 24, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 26, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 26, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 24, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 24, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 1, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 1, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 1, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 1, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 28, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 28, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 19, 2011 | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2010 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jul 21, 2010 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jul 21, 2010 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jul 20, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 19, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Apr 16, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |