USPTO serial 87395590
MULE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WRIGHT, MARCO JABBAR
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 120 - 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 MULE?
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.
Jonathan Grant Morton
246 WEST BROADWAYNEW YORK, NY 10013UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 026 | Lace; Embroidery; ribbons; braids; buttons; hooks and eyes; pins, namely, sewing pins, hat pins, curling pins, safety pins, bobby pins, marking pins, ornamental novelty pins; needles; artificial flowers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 2021 | 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. |
| Mar 31, 2021 | 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 16, 2020 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 16, 2020 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 16, 2020 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 15, 2020 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 15, 2020 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 4, 2020 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2020 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2020 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 3, 2020 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 3, 2020 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 25, 2020 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 26, 2019 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2019 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2019 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 6, 2019 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 6, 2019 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 2019 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 6, 2019 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2019 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2019 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 5, 2019 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 28, 2019 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 2, 2018 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 2, 2018 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 26, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 18, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 18, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 2018 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 24, 2017 | 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, 2017 | 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, 2017 | 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, 2017 | 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 24, 2017 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 7, 2017 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Apr 5, 2017 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |