USPTO serial 75392193
HYPERFORM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MARTIN, JENNIFER MCGARRY
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 HYPERFORM?
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.
JENNIFER L WHITELAW
3838 TAMIAMI TRAIL N 3RD FLNAPLES, FL 34103UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR USE BY LARGE CORPORATE ORGANIZATIONAL ENTITIES IN TRACKING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | COMPUTER EDUCATION TRAINING IN THE FIELD OF CORPORATE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | COMPUTER CONSULTATION; DATABASE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES; COMPUTER SOFTWARE DESIGN FOR OTHERS; AND COMPUTER SOFTWARE INSTALLATION, ALL IN THE FIELD OF CORPORATE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 2004 | 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 24, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 7, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 5, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 18, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 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. |
| Feb 16, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 31, 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. |
| Aug 10, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 27, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |