Drawing for PROSOFT TECHNOLOGIES

USPTO serial 75404097

PROSOFT TECHNOLOGIES

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 601
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
LOWRY, LEIGH A
Law office
FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)

What this means

This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.

Need help with PROSOFT TECHNOLOGIES?

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.

Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.

Owner

Attorney of record

The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.

GREGORY J BURKE

GREGORY J BURKE OFFICE OF CLIFFORD A POFFKOPPERS BLDG STE 2230PITTSBURGH, PA 15219-1826UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
040converting data files to software-compatible formatsINACTIVE - INSUFFICIENT FEE RECEIVED—
042Computer software consultation services, namely, consulting with respect to the customization, installation and use of educational and business softwareACTIVE—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Jun 5, 2002ABN1ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED—
May 22, 2002EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Feb 8, 2002CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Jan 14, 2002JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Jan 11, 2002CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
Jan 11, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Nov 14, 2001JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
May 17, 2001CNEAEXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED—
Dec 17, 1999CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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 8, 1999JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Dec 8, 1999EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Oct 22, 1999CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Apr 26, 1999CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon.
Mar 19, 1999CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Nov 2, 1998CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Oct 13, 1998DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Oct 6, 1998DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance