USPTO serial 75555716
VALUES-BASED SAFETY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Reg. 2590011Status 710
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- Jul 2, 2002
- Examiner
- BENZMILLER, ANDREW
- Law office
- POST REGISTRATION
What this means
Status 710 means the registration was cancelled because a required Section 8 declaration of continued use was not filed within the deadline (including any grace period). The federal registration is no longer active. Evaluate filing a new application if you still use the mark, or petition if cancellation was erroneous. Consult counsel on remaining common-law rights.
Need help with VALUES-BASED SAFETY?
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
Missouri City, TX
Missouri City, TX
Montgomery, TX
Montgomery, TX
MONTGOMERY, TX
MONTGOMERY, TX
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JO KATHERINE D'AMBROSIO
Usha Menon D'Ambrosio & Menon, LLP2825 Wilcrest DriveSuite 486Houston, TX 77042Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | business consultation, namely, consultation concerning safety in the workforce | SECTION 8 - CANCELLED | Jun 1, 1993 |
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 McSween, Terry
- Other trademarks owned by McSween, Terry
- Other trademarks owned by McSween, Terry
- Other trademarks owned by McSween, Terry
- Other trademarks owned by QSE CONSULTING, L.L.C.
- Other trademarks owned by QSE CONSULTING, L.L.C.
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Similar marks named VALUES-BASED SAFETY
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 8, 2013 | CAEX | CANCELLED SEC. 8 (10-YR)/EXPIRED SECTION 9 | — |
| Aug 8, 2011 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 15, 2009 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jul 10, 2008 | 8.OK | REGISTERED - SEC. 8 (6-YR) ACCEPTED | The USPTO accepted your Section 8 declaration showing the mark is still in use in commerce (or excusable nonuse). This satisfies the six-year maintenance requirement and keeps the registration active until the next renewal deadline. |
| Jun 30, 2008 | PLGL | ASSIGNED TO PARALEGAL | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | ES8R | TEAS SECTION 8 RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 28, 2007 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 27, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 2, 2002 | R.SR | REGISTERED-SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | Your mark is registered on the Supplemental Register, which is available for marks that are not yet distinctive enough for the Principal Register but can still identify a source. Protection is more limited than Principal Register registration but can later support a Principal Register application. |
| Mar 12, 2002 | CNTA | APPROVED FOR REGISTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 12, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 12, 2002 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Jan 28, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 19, 2001 | 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 17, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 22, 2001 | 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. |
| Jan 21, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 29, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 27, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2000 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 17, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 17, 1999 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 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. |
| Apr 12, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |