USPTO serial 75692634
ULTRAQUEST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEBSTER, WILLIAM M
- Law office
- TTAB
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 ULTRAQUEST?
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.
Jeffrey H Kaufman
JEFFREY H KAUFMAN OBLON SPIVAK MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT1940 DUKE STALEXANDRIA, VA 22314UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer software used to build and execute reports and applications provided over a global computer network | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 30, 2003 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 30, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 30, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 13, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 29, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 3, 2001 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 19, 2001 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 19, 2001 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jul 9, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 9, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 7, 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. |
| Jul 13, 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. |
| Jul 12, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 21, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 21, 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. |
| Sep 30, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |