USPTO serial 85024437
SEASONAL PROTECTIVE GEAR SPG
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 SEASONAL PROTECTIVE GEAR SPG?
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
Markham, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Christopher L. Sorey
CHRISTOPHER L. SOREY WYRICK ROBBINS YATES & PONTON, LLP4101 LAKE BOONE TRL STE 300RALEIGH, NC 27607-7506UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | Headwear namely hats and caps; scarves; gloves; mittens; clothing, namely, jackets | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 10, 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. |
| Jun 10, 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. |
| Oct 28, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 28, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 28, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 28, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 24, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2013 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 9, 2013 | 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. |
| Sep 5, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 4, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 30, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 21, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 20, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 20, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 26, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 24, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 24, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 24, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Mar 9, 2011 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 9, 2011 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 28, 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. |
| Feb 28, 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. |
| 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 | — |
| May 1, 2010 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |