Brandinium

Trademark search for:

EL BRACKET

EXPIRED USPTO USPTO

No active United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) registrations found, based on publicly available USPTO trademark records.

Trademark records may change over time. For the most up-to-date trademark status, domain availability, and social handle checks, run a live search.

Live search · Most up-to-date results
Also check across: EU CA AU NZ CH

USPTO Filing History

Key events recorded for this trademark application

  • 2003-11-24 — Application filed
  • 2003-12-15 — Application filed
  • 2004-06-23 — Assigned to examiner
  • 2004-06-28 — Final disposition recorded
  • 2005-01-24 — Application abandoned
  • 2005-01-24 — Application abandoned
  • 2005-02-01 — Teas change of owner address received
  • 2005-02-01 — Teas change of correspondence received
  • 2005-02-24 — Office action issued
  • 2005-02-24 — Petition to revive-granted
  • 2005-02-24 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2005-02-24 — Teas petition to revive received
  • 2005-03-11 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2005-03-11 — Assigned to lie
  • 2005-03-16 — Suspension letter written
  • 2005-03-16 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
  • 2005-03-28 — Paper received
  • 2005-04-15 — Applicant/correspondence changes (non-responsive) entered
  • 2005-10-28 — Suspension checked - to attorney for action
  • 2005-10-29 — Suspension inquiry written
  • 2005-10-29 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
  • 2005-11-15 — Office action issued
  • 2005-11-15 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2005-12-13 — Suspension letter written
  • 2005-12-13 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
  • 2005-12-13 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2006-06-14 — Suspension checked - to attorney for action
  • 2006-06-19 — Suspension inquiry written
  • 2006-06-19 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
  • 2007-01-15 — Application abandoned
  • 2007-01-16 — Application abandoned
  • 2007-01-29 — Office action issued
  • 2007-01-29 — Petition to revive-granted
  • 2007-01-29 — Teas petition to revive received
  • 2007-01-31 — Assigned to lie
  • 2007-05-22 — Suspension letter written
  • 2007-05-22 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
  • 2007-05-22 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2007-05-22 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2007-11-28 — Report completed suspension check case still suspended
  • 2008-06-16 — Suspension inquiry written
  • 2008-06-16 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
  • 2008-06-16 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
  • 2008-10-21 — Assigned to examiner
  • 2008-12-02 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
  • 2008-12-02 — Teas change of correspondence received
  • 2008-12-24 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2008-12-24 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2008-12-29 — Suspension letter written
  • 2008-12-29 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
  • 2008-12-29 — Notification of letter of suspension e-mailed
  • 2009-07-02 — Suspension checked - to attorney for action
  • 2009-07-21 — Suspension inquiry written
  • 2009-07-21 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
  • 2009-07-21 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
  • 2010-01-18 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
  • 2010-01-22 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2010-01-22 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2010-01-25 — Suspension letter written
  • 2010-01-25 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
  • 2010-01-25 — Notification of letter of suspension e-mailed
  • 2010-07-27 — Suspension checked - to attorney for action
  • 2010-07-30 — Suspension inquiry written
  • 2010-07-30 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
  • 2010-07-30 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
  • 2011-02-28 — Application abandoned
  • 2011-02-28 — Application abandoned
  • 2011-02-28 — Final status recorded

Owner Information

Peak Innovations Inc.
Richmond CA

Correspondent

PEAK INNOVATIONS INC.
Suite 203 - 11782 Hammersmith Way
Richmond, V7A 5E2
CANADA

Filing Details

Filing Date:
2003-11-24
Status Date:
2011-02-28
Category:
Metals
Filing Year:
2003

Disclaimer: This page is informational only and does not constitute legal advice. Trademark availability depends on jurisdiction, usage, and legal interpretation.