USPTO serial 75740501
WEBSUXESS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CAPSHAW, DANIEL
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 WEBSUXESS?
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.
BURTON S EHRLICH
BURTON S EHRLICH LADAS & PARRY LLP224 S MICHIGAN AVE STE 1600CHICAGO, IL 60604UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software used to track visitor behavior in web sites by analyzing web server log files | ACTIVE | Nov 19, 1998 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2013 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2013 | 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 23, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 9, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 7, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2012 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 12, 2011 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 7, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 7, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 7, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 17, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 16, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 1, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 1, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 29, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 26, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 26, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 26, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 14, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 10, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 10, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 9, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 8, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 8, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 17, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 17, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 3, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 30, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 30, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 3, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 26, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 22, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 13, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 6, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 9, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 23, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 21, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 21, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 3, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 9, 2004 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 24, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 14, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 29, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2000 | 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. |
| May 1, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 1, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 4, 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. |
| Oct 13, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |