USPTO serial 85364372
DOUBLE HERON
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KEATING, MICHAEL P
- 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 DOUBLE HERON?
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
British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John C. Linderman
JOHN C. LINDERMAN MCCORMICK, PAULDING, & HUBER LLP185 ASYLUM STCityPlace IIHARTFORD, CT 06103-3410Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | Rice; rice-based snack foods and products made from rice, namely, snack bars, bread, chips, cereal, flour, biscuits, cookies, custard, noodles, vermicelli, edible rice paper, pudding, frozen rice entrees, prepared rice entrees, packaged rice entrees | ACTIVE | — |
| 032 | non-alcoholic rice-based beverages not being milk substitutes | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | wholesale store, retail store services featuring food products; wholesale distributorships featuring food products | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 5, 2017 | 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. |
| Jun 5, 2017 | 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 7, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 6, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 6, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 6, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 5, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 5, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 4, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 21, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 16, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 15, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 15, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 15, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 8, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 1, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 2, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 1, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 13, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 12, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 12, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 2, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 5, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 4, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 23, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 16, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 15, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 12, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 11, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 11, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 23, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Oct 24, 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. |
| Oct 24, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 13, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jul 9, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |