USPTO serial 73457579
PHASORLINK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SPARROW, MARY
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 PHASORLINK?
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
INTERNATIONAL PHASOR TELECOM LTD.
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
RAYMOND C. STEWART
RAYMOND C STEWART BIRCH, STEWART, KOLASCH & BIRCH301 N WASHINGTON STP O BOX 747FALLS CHURCH, VA 22046-0747Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | OUTBOARD MIRCROPROCESSOR FOR CODING AND ENCODING VIDEO/AUDIO SIGNALS FOR SATELLITE TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION | ABANDONED | Jun 20, 1983 |
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 21, 1992 | 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. |
| Jul 2, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 30, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 30, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 23, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 24, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 23, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 17, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 1986 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 25, 1986 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 4, 1985 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 6, 1985 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 23, 1985 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 25, 1985 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 21, 1984 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 21, 1984 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| May 30, 1984 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |