USPTO serial 75157430
BUSINESS CLOUT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CROSS, TRACY L
- 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 BUSINESS CLOUT?
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
Etobicoke, Ontario M9B 6K5, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ALAN BLUM
ALAN BLUM WHITE & CASE1155 AVE OF THE AMERICASNEW YORK, NY 10036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | providing multiple-user access to a global computer information network for the transfer and dissemination of a wide range of information and intended specifically for home-office applications | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 20, 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. |
| Mar 25, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 3, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 7, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 9, 2000 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 16, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 28, 1998 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 5, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 27, 1997 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 1997 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 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. |
| Mar 21, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |