USPTO serial 74220305
THINC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEBER, BRIAN W
- 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 THINC?
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.
Robert O. Sailer
ROBERT O SAILER SAILER & CO PS16770 N E 79TH ST STE 205REDMOND, WA 98052UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | custom software in the field of databases and computerized information systems | ABANDONED | Dec 10, 1988 |
| 041 | educational services; namely, computer education training and distributing course materials in connection therewith | ABANDONED | Jun 16, 1987 |
| 042 | design and integration of computer systems, and design and programming of custom computer software for others, and computer consultation services | ABANDONED | Jun 16, 1987 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 28, 1993 | 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 26, 1993 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Nov 30, 1992 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 13, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 31, 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. |
| Jul 17, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 13, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 6, 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. |
| Jan 25, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 24, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 15, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |