USPTO serial 86295772
KT-H
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STOIDES, KATHERINE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 KT-H?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
J. Robert LeBlanc
J. ROBERT LEBLANC HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP2323 VICTORY AVE STE 700DALLAS, TX 75219-7673UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Lamps and lights for medical purposes for use in wound healing and cosmesis procedures | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 8, 2020 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2020 | 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 18, 2019 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2019 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2019 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 17, 2019 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 13, 2019 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2019 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2019 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 9, 2019 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 9, 2019 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 5, 2019 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 23, 2018 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 23, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 23, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 22, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 22, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 2018 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 30, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 30, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 30, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 12, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 28, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 8, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 8, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 7, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 23, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 10, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 8, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 5, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 5, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 3, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 10, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 10, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 10, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 17, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 14, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 6, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 6, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 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. |
| Jun 27, 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 27, 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 27, 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 27, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 12, 2014 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jun 3, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |