USPTO serial 85121691
"WORLD FAMOUS" GIBBY DOGS GD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TRIPI, CYNTHIA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 118- 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 "WORLD FAMOUS" GIBBY DOGS GD?
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
Mooretown, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Helen Hill Minsker
Helen Hill Minsker BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD.10 S WACKER DR STE 3000CHICAGO, IL 60606-7437UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 23, 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. |
| Oct 23, 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. |
| Mar 27, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 10, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 9, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 20, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 20, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 20, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 4, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 11, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 8, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 31, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 31, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 31, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 10, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 2, 2011 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 27, 2011 | EWAF | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED-FIRM RETAINS | — |
| Jul 6, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 6, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 14, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 14, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 14, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Dec 14, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2010 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Sep 7, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Sep 6, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |