USPTO serial 73803461
DIGIPIX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELENKER, ESTHER
- 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 DIGIPIX?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
W. NORMAN ROTH
W NORMAN ROTH ROTH & GOLDMAN523 W 6TH STSTE 840LOS ANGELES, CA 90014Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER APPARATUS ALL BEING ELECTRICAL OR ELECTRONIC; DATA PROCESSING APPARATUS; COMPUTER PROGRAMS PERTAINING TO DATA PROCESSING STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; TAPES, CASSETTES, CARTRIDGES, DISCS FEATURING AUDIO VISUAL ENTERTAINMENT, WIRES AND FILAMENTS, ALL FOR BEARING SOUND AND/OR VIDEO RECORDINGS; SOUND RECORDINGS, VIDEO RECORDINGS; SOUND AND VIDEO RECORDINGS; SOUND AND/OR VISUAL RECORDING, REPRODUCING, RECEIVING, AMPLIFYING AND TRANSMITTING APPARTUS AND INSTRUMENTS; VIDEO PROJECTION APPARATUS; TELEVISION RECEIVERS AND TELEVISION DISPLAY SCREENS | ABANDONED | — |
| 042 | COMPUTER PROGRAMMING SERVICES; CONSULTING SERVICES IN THE FIELD OF COMPUTER AND COMPUTER DESIGNING SERVICES | ABANDONED | — |
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. |
| Jun 18, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 5, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 16, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 29, 1989 | 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. |
| Aug 9, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |