USPTO serial 85053769
ICELED
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEIPZIG, MARC J
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 ICELED?
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
Welland, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Rachelle A. Dubow, Esq.
Rachelle A. Dubow, Esq. Bingham McCutchen LLPOne Federal StreetBoston, MA 02110UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE (LED) LIGHT BULBS | 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 1, 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. |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Nov 30, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 19, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 16, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 16, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 15, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 15, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 14, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 9, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 9, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 9, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 9, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 9, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 27, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 8, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 8, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 31, 2011 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 31, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 31, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 24, 2011 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 15, 2011 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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 15, 2011 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Sep 22, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 9, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jun 8, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jun 7, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |