USPTO serial 86109419
SEDICLEAN FILTRATION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BROWN, BARBARA TROFFKIN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 SEDICLEAN FILTRATION?
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
Abbotsford, BC, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Karl E. Gustafson
KARL E. GUSTAFSON MCMILLAN LLP1500-1055 West Georgia StreetPO Box 11117, Royal CentreVancouver, BC, V6E4N7Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | plant nutrients for use in hydroponic and soil gardens | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 2018 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 11, 2015 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2015 | 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. |
| Feb 13, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 10, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 23, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 22, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 1, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 30, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 13, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 30, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 19, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 14, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 7, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |