USPTO serial 75613016
FRONTEND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAWRENCE, SUSAN KASTRINER
- 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 FRONTEND?
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
2623 PG DELFT, NL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
FRANCIE R GOROWITZ
FRANCIE R GOROWITZ LADAS & PARRY LAW OFFICE5670 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 2100LOS ANGELES, CA 90036-5679UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | INTERCOMMUNICATION APPARATUS, NAMELY, COMPUTER HARDWARE COMMUNICATIONS SERVERS; COMMUNICATIONS SOFTWARE FOR CONNECTING COMPUTER NETWORK USERS AND/OR GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORKS; RADIOS, DVD PLAYERS, TELEPHONES, INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, AND COMPUTER SOFTWARE NAMELY OPERATING SYSTEMS SOFTWARE FOR COMPRESSION, STORAGE, AND RETRIEVAL OF DATA | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | COMPUTER PROGRAMMING FOR OTHERS; GRAPHIC ARTS DESIGN SERVICES AND LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTING SERVICES; PRINTING SERVICES; AND SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND UPDATING FOR OTHERS | ACTIVE | — |
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 29, 2003 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 12, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 15, 2002 | 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. |
| Nov 15, 2001 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 8, 2001 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Apr 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 12, 2000 | 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. |
| Mar 20, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 20, 2000 | 1.BD | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Mar 20, 2000 | 44EA | SEC. 44(E) CLAIM ADDED | — |
| Jan 21, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 19, 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. |
| Jul 13, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |