USPTO serial 75647006
I-CONTENT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHANAHAN, PATRICK
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 I-CONTENT?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
SUSAN J BARRICELLA
PETER J RIEBLING ARTER & HADDEN LLPTHIRD FL L ST ENTRANCE1801 K ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20006-1304Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER SOFTWARE AVAILABLE VIA A GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORK FOR USE IN THE CREATION AND MANAGEMENT OF ONLINE PUBLICATIONS | ACTIVE | Jan 31, 1999 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 24, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2005 | 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 6, 2004 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 26, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 8, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 4, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 29, 2001 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 21, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2000 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 27, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 12, 2000 | 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. |
| Aug 27, 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. |
| Aug 13, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 11, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 17, 1999 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 13, 1999 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |