USPTO serial 74071640
TECHNICAL ADVISORY SERVICE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEVY, MICHAEL S
- 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 TECHNICAL ADVISORY SERVICE?
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.
Lewis F. Gould, Jr.
LEWIS F GOULD JR ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLOTTSTE 3232 1700 MARKET STPHILADELPHIA, PA 19103UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | computerized referral services providing technical and scientific expert consultants to attorneys and insurance companies to aid in the preparation of legal cases, and to business, industry and governmental agencies for technical and scientific cousultation | ABANDONED | Feb 1, 1967 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 2, 1995 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 1, 1995 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jan 2, 1995 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 27, 1994 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 1994 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 26, 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 14, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 29, 1992 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 4, 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. |
| Mar 9, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Jun 14, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 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 16, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |