USPTO serial 75408074
DMC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GILBERT, REBECCA L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 DMC?
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.
ROBERT J KOCH
ROBERT J KOCH FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI LLP801 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2604UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | data processing and management consulting services international class 35 | ACTIVE | Sep 11, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 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. |
| Apr 24, 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. |
| Sep 26, 2005 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 15, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 15, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 18, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2003 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A 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. |
| Apr 22, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 4, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 23, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 21, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 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. |
| Aug 24, 1998 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 20, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |