USPTO serial 85463601
JEEVAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DELGIZZI, RONALD ERNEST
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 JEEVAN?
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
Surrey, BC V3W 7J1, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Philana S. Handler
Philana S. Handler WHITHAM, CURTIS, CHRISTOFFERSON & COOK,11491 SUNSET HILLS RD STE 340RESTON, VA 20190-5244UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | Frozen entrees consisting primarily of meat, seafood, poultry or vegetables; hot dogs, namely, meat only, not sandwiches; meat; prepared meals consisting primarily of meat, seafood, poultry or vegetables; and seafood, namely, not live seafood | ACTIVE | — |
| 030 | Frozen entrees consisting primarily of pasta or rice; marinades; prepared meals consisting primarily of pasta or rice; rice; sauces; and spices | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Jun 1, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 26, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 26, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 26, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 8, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 24, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 23, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 4, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 16, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 16, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 16, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 16, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 12, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 12, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 11, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 10, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 10, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 4, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 5, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 5, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 4, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 3, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 3, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 8, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 6, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 4, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 3, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 3, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 28, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 28, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 23, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 21, 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. |
| Aug 21, 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. |
| Feb 23, 2012 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2012 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2012 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 8, 2011 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 7, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |