USPTO serial 75383944
DNA COMPUTING INC.
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SMIGA, HOWARD
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 DNA COMPUTING INC.?
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.
ANTHONY M ABRAHAM
ERNEST H GELMAN667 MADISON AVE 24TH FLNEW YORK, NY 10021UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | Installation, maintenance and repair of computer networks | ACTIVE | Dec 22, 1992 |
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 10, 2006 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 14, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 14, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 6, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 15, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 15, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 20, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 7, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 21, 1999 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 21, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 12, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 13, 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. |
| Jul 23, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 15, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |