USPTO serial 85205012
BADDASS REFLECTOR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RHIM, ANDREW
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 BADDASS REFLECTOR?
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
Abbotsford, BC, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 011 | light reflectors for use in the field of hydroponic plant growing | 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 9, 2018 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 24, 2015 | 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 23, 2015 | 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 10, 2014 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 9, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 9, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 6, 2014 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 4, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 21, 2013 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 13, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 13, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 9, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 31, 2013 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 30, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 29, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 22, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 16, 2013 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 15, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 5, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 5, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 20, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 18, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 16, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 8, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 25, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 18, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 18, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 18, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 18, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 17, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 5, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 4, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 4, 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 24, 2011 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Mar 23, 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. |
| Mar 23, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 5, 2011 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Dec 27, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |