USPTO serial 85924001
SLIP NOT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HALMEN, KATHERINE E
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 SLIP NOT?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Brooks R. Bruneau
BROOKS R. BRUNEAU FisherBroyles, LLP100 Overlook CenterSecond FloorPRINCETON, NJ 08540Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 024 | Bedding covers, namely, mattress covers, mattress pads and sets of bedding covers containing a mattress pad and bed sheets | 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 12, 2025 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 14, 2018 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| May 26, 2017 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| May 2, 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. |
| May 2, 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. |
| Oct 4, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 14, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 11, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 11, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 4, 2016 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 4, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 28, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 28, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 8, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 5, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 4, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 4, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 25, 2015 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 25, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 15, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 15, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 3, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 26, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 26, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 26, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 19, 2014 | 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 30, 2013 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Aug 30, 2013 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Aug 30, 2013 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Aug 23, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 13, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 9, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |