USPTO serial 87023242
FREIGHT TO THE POINT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHHINA, KARANENDRA S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 FREIGHT TO THE POINT?
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
Hartland,New Brunswick, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark A. Watkins
MARK A. WATKINS VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLPP.O. BOX 2255IPLAW@VORYS.COMCOLUMBUS, OH 43216-2255Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 039 | Operation of a website making bookings and reservations for others in the field of freight transportation services, courier services and warehousing; courier services; freight forwarding services; freight transportation by air; freight transportation by boat; freight transportation by rail; freight transportation by truck; warehouse storage services; warehousing | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 13, 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. |
| Feb 12, 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. |
| Aug 1, 2019 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2019 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2019 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 8, 2019 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 7, 2019 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2019 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2019 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 28, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 26, 2018 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 26, 2018 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 5, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 5, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 5, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 23, 2018 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 21, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 12, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 12, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 4, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 15, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 11, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 11, 2017 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 1, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 29, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 2016 | 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 22, 2016 | 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. |
| Aug 22, 2016 | 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. |
| Aug 22, 2016 | 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. |
| Aug 18, 2016 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 6, 2016 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 6, 2016 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |