USPTO serial 74716462
VISIONPAK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROSSMAN, MARY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108
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 VISIONPAK?
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
Baltimore, MD
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JULIE A. MATHESON
ROBIN RAMSWICK FULLER MC515ATHE ST PAUL COMPANIES INC385 WASHINGTON STSAINT PAUL, MN 55102Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | insurance underwriting services for emerging technology companies in the field of property and casualty | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 9, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 17, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Oct 14, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 1, 2004 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 31, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 31, 2004 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| May 24, 2004 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 22, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 7, 1998 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 1998 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Dec 11, 1997 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| May 29, 1997 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 29, 1997 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 5, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 5, 1996 | 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. |
| Aug 5, 1996 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 5, 1996 | 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. |
| Dec 19, 1995 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |