USPTO serial 85107009
PROTI-SANDWICH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEVINE, HOWARD B
- 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 PROTI-SANDWICH?
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
Lachine, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John H. Weber
JOHN H. WEBER BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP1050 CONNECTICUT AVE NW STE 1100Washington SquareWASHINGTON, DC 20036-5304Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | cereal based high protein food energy bars | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 3, 2016 | 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. |
| Oct 3, 2016 | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 29, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 26, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 26, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 26, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 26, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 26, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 19, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 15, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 20, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 30, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 24, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 24, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 21, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 4, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 11, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 10, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 10, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 21, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 21, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 21, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 4, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 2, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 1, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 1, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 24, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 11, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 11, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 20, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 20, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 2, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 25, 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. |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Nov 30, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 18, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 17, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |