USPTO serial 74384271
SHL SYSTEMHOUSE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEBSTER, WILLIAM M
- 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 SHL SYSTEMHOUSE?
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
Ottawa, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Edwin Komen
EDWIN KOMEN CLEARY & KOMEN600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE S ESTE 200WASHINGTON, DC 20003-4304Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | installation and maintenance of computer-based information systems, computer networks and peripheral computer equipment | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | training services relating to the operation of computer-based information systems, computer software and hardware | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | updating of computer software; custom design of computer software and hardware systems; custom computer programming and computer consultation services | ACTIVE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 17, 2000 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 1998 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 12, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 10, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 29, 1997 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 21, 1996 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 3, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 26, 1995 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 26, 1995 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 27, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 9, 1994 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 16, 1993 | 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. |