USPTO serial 85807432
ALGO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELL, MARLENE D
- 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 ALGO?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Karin Segall
KARIN SEGALL LEASON ELLIS LLP1 BARKER AVE FL 5WHITE PLAINS, NY 10601-1523UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 020 | Portable display and exhibit stands | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 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. |
| Mar 18, 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. |
| Aug 8, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 1, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 26, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 14, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 29, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 22, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 17, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 2, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 2, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 25, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 2, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 12, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 8, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 18, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 18, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 11, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2013 | 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. |
| Apr 8, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 8, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Dec 24, 2012 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |