USPTO serial 75148574
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
LAWRENCE E. ABELMAN
LAWRENCE E ABELMAN ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB150 E 42ND STNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer hardware, software, and associated telecommunications equipment all used for the transmission, reception, storage, reproduction and processing of sounds, signals, characters, images, data and messages | ACTIVE | — |
| 037 | installation, maintenance, and repair of computer and telecommunications equipment used for data processing | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | computer education training services in the fields of data processing and electronic communications | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | computer consultation in the field of data processing equipment; computer software and site design for others in the fields of data processing and information management; and rental of computers and software | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2002 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 15, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 11, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 28, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 1998 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 7, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 2, 1997 | 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. |
| Feb 13, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |