USPTO serial 74063099
THE ENTERPRISE ROUTER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- REIHNER, DAVID
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with THE ENTERPRISE ROUTER?
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
Montreal, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Christopher B. Fagan
CHRISTOPHER B FAGAN FAY, SHARPE, BEALL, FAGAN, ET AL1100 SUPERIOR AVESTE 700CLEVELAND, OH 44114-2518Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer software and related instruction and user manuals sold as a unit for the operation of computers in a networked environment | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1, 1995 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 1, 1995 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Dec 6, 1994 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 30, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 1994 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 3, 1994 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 2, 1993 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jun 2, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 1992 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 25, 1992 | 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. |
| Feb 10, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 8, 1991 | 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 10, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 8, 1990 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 16, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |