USPTO serial 86220217
MICROALGAE. MACRO SOLUTIONS
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 MICROALGAE. MACRO SOLUTIONS?
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
South San Francisco, CA
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John C. Baum
JOHN C. BAUM OWEN, WICKERSHAM & ERICKSON, P.C.455 MARKET ST STE 1910SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-5408UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | CHEMICALS, NAMELY, ALGAL DERIVATIVES FOR USE IN THE MANUFACTURE OF COSMETICS, NUTRACEUTICALS, FOOD, FUEL ADDITIVES, SOAPS, CLEANING MATERIALS, OIL-BASED PRODUCTS, AND A WIDE VARIETY OF GOODS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 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. |
| Dec 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. |
| May 8, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 24, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 22, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 30, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 30, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 10, 2016 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Mar 31, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 19, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 31, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 31, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 6, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 21, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 18, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| 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 2, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 1, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 1, 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. |
| Jun 12, 2014 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 2014 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 2014 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 27, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 17, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |