USPTO serial 74291765
STRATEGIC STORYTELLING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCLEOD, LINDA K.
- 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 STRATEGIC STORYTELLING?
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.
David L. Charne
DAVID L CHARNE355 RIVERSIDE DR STE #3-ENEW YORK, NY 10025-2759UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | business information services and business consultation services | ABANDONED | Aug 13, 1992 |
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 7, 1994 | 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 12, 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. |
| May 7, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 9, 1992 | CNRU | DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 30, 1992 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 4, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 1992 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |