Drawing for CROSS NETPEN

USPTO serial 75589588

CROSS NETPEN

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
GARTNER, JOHN M
Law office
INTENT TO USE SECTION

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 CROSS NETPEN?

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.

A. Jason Mirabito

CAROL H PETERS MINTZ, LEVIN, COHN, FERRISGLOVSKY & POPEO PCONE FINANCIAL CTRBOSTON, MA 2111

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009Electronic apparatus in the shape of a pen that is capable of recording information and launching applications on a global or local computer information networkACTIVE—
016Pens for recording information and launching applications on a global or local computer information networkACTIVE—

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
Sep 18, 2013ASCKASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY—
Jun 1, 2006MAB6ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window.
Jun 1, 2006ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window.
Oct 15, 2005EX5GSOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED—
Sep 21, 2005EXT5SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED—
Sep 21, 2005FAXXFAX RECEIVED—
Mar 8, 2005EX4GSOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED—
Mar 3, 2005EXT4SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED—
Mar 3, 2005FAXXFAX RECEIVED—
Mar 3, 2005FAXXFAX RECEIVED—
Oct 9, 2004EX3GSOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED—
Sep 24, 2004PETGPETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED—
Sep 14, 2004EXT3SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED—
Sep 14, 2004FAXXFAX RECEIVED—
Jun 10, 2004EX2GSOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED—
May 28, 2004ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window.
May 12, 2004PETRPETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED—
May 12, 2004FAXXFAX RECEIVED—
Mar 25, 2004EXT2SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED—
Jul 21, 2003EX1GSOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED—
Jul 1, 2003EXT1SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED—
Jul 1, 2003MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Mar 25, 2003NOAMNOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANTA Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date.
Dec 31, 2002PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance.
Dec 11, 2002NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION—
Nov 4, 2002CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER—
Oct 18, 2002DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Sep 17, 2002REINREINSTATED—
Jul 18, 20021.ADSEC. 1(A) CLAIM DELETED—
Jul 18, 2002PETRPETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED—
Jul 18, 2002MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Jul 2, 2002ABN2ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSEThe 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.
May 13, 2002MAILPAPER RECEIVED—
Nov 14, 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.
Jun 26, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Dec 26, 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.
Dec 21, 2000IUAAUSE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED—
Dec 20, 2000DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Dec 18, 2000AUPCAMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE—
Sep 25, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Sep 25, 2000IUAFUSE AMENDMENT FILED—
Mar 23, 2000CNFRFINAL 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.
Dec 15, 1999CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jun 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.
Jun 11, 1999DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance