USPTO serial 85896448
EROPLAZ
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CLARK, ANDREW T
- 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 EROPLAZ?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert W. Adams
ROBERT W. ADAMS NIXON & VANDERHYE, P.C.901 N GLEBE RD FL 11ARLINGTON, VA 22203-1853UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Pharmaceutical preparations, namely, recombinant-erythropoietin for stimulating red blood cell production used to treat anemia | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10, 2019 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE E-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. |
| Sep 10, 2019 | 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. |
| Jul 3, 2019 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jan 31, 2019 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 31, 2019 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 31, 2019 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 16, 2018 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 11, 2018 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 8, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 8, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 8, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 6, 2018 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 15, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 12, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 24, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 24, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 24, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 18, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 18, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 14, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 10, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 1, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 14, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 14, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 5, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 4, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 26, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 15, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 15, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 7, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 7, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 7, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 4, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 4, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 4, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 23, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 19, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 28, 2013 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| May 20, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 16, 2013 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 12, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Apr 9, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |