USPTO serial 75392141
COYOTE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BORSUK, ESTHER
- 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 COYOTE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC?
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.
JOANNE LUDOVICI-LINT
JOANNE LUDOVICI-LINT MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY600 13TH ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20005-3096UNITED STATESGoods and services
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.
- Other trademarks owned by Sattel Communications, L.L.C.
- Other trademarks owned by COYOTE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 038
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named COYOTE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
- Prosecution event ABN2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 29, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 31, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 24, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 11, 2000 | PC.D | PETITION TO DIRECTOR DISMISSED | — |
| Jan 7, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2000 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Oct 8, 1999 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 12, 1999 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 30, 1999 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 1999 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 16, 1999 | LOPT | LETTER OF PROTEST EVIDENCE FORWARDED | — |
| May 21, 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. |
| Mar 29, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 6, 1999 | LOPT | LETTER OF PROTEST EVIDENCE FORWARDED | — |
| Sep 29, 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. |
| Sep 8, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |