USPTO serial 75352710
SMART CITY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CORDOVA, RAUL
- 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 SMART CITY?
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.
JEFFREY S TENENBAUM
JEFFREY S TENENBAUM GALLAND KHARASCH & GARFINKLE PC1054 31ST ST NW STE 200WASHINGTON, DC 20007-4492UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| B | standards for the designation of a municipal or regional government, or other public agency, as an entity which has effective plans or programs, and whose economic development officials have completed an educational program, relating to communications and information technology as the centerpiece of job creation and business development efforts, typically but not exclusively through the development of a teleport facility | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 23, 1999 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 22, 1999 | 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 1, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 11, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 1998 | 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. |
| Apr 30, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |