USPTO serial 75616485
IMAGO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CROSS, TRACY L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 IMAGO?
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
Centrepoint S/W Technologies Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario K1J 9B9, CA
OTTAWA, ONTARIO K1Z 8P9, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lawrence E. Abelman
LAWRENCE E ABELMAN ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 3RD AVE 10TH FLNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware incorporating software for creating an interface between facsimile machines and computers for the scanning, data transfer, and physical conversion of documents into electronic file format | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 6, 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. |
| Sep 6, 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. |
| Feb 8, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 16, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 15, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 8, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 12, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 5, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 8, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 22, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 17, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 25, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 24, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 25, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 20, 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 15, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |