USPTO serial 85141090
NUTRILAB
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHANG, KATHERINE S
- 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 NUTRILAB?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael J. Leonard
Michael J. Leonard Fox Rothschild LLP997 Lenox Drive, Building 3Lawrenceville, NJ 08648-2311UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | Chemical water conditioners; spray adjuvants for use with pesticides for spraying crops; plant and crop nutrition preparations; plant and crop protection agents, namely, fertilizers; plant stimulators, namely, preparations for fortifying plants; plant activators, namely, substances for regulating plant growth and preparations for fortifying plants; spray adjuvant for use with wetter spreader agricultural chemicals | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 27, 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. |
| Aug 27, 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. |
| Jan 29, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 29, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 29, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 29, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 29, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 29, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 23, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 30, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 23, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 23, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 15, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 9, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 13, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 13, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 13, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 13, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 6, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 5, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 5, 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. |
| Jan 11, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 11, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 11, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 5, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 2, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |