Drawing for TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS

USPTO serial 75474122

TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
BALDWIN, SCOTT
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 TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS?

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.

CAMILLE M MILLER

CAMILLE M MILLER COZEN O'CONNOR, PC1900 MARKET STPHILADELPHIA, PA 19103UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
042consulting services in the field of problems experienced on construction projects using a technique which analyzes the effect of a particular event on scheduled activities using proprietary techniques and methodologyACTIVE—

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
Feb 22, 2004EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Feb 6, 2004CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Jun 10, 2003EXFBEXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF—
Apr 2, 2003ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Feb 20, 2003EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Feb 12, 2003EXAFEXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB—
Aug 2, 2002CNCFCONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED—
May 28, 2002CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Nov 26, 2001CNRTNON-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 26, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Oct 26, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Apr 30, 2001CNRTNON-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.
Feb 14, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Aug 14, 2000CNRTNON-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.
Apr 20, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Apr 19, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Oct 21, 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.
Jun 1, 1999CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Dec 29, 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.
Nov 30, 1998DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance