USPTO serial 86099213
ULTRA NT RADIANT BARRIER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- POLLACK, ALISON FRIEDBERG
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 ULTRA NT RADIANT BARRIER?
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
Etobicoke, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kristin Altoff
KRISTIN ALTOFF MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP1111 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2541UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 017 | Reflective building insulation material | 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 11, 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 11, 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. |
| Sep 11, 2019 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2019 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2019 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2019 | 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. |
| Jan 9, 2019 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 22, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 9, 2018 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 6, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 20, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 20, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 18, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 19, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 23, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 1, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 22, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 22, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 17, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 29, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 29, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 29, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 12, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 11, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 30, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 30, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 24, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 9, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 28, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 25, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 5, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 5, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 22, 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 19, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 29, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 26, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |