USPTO serial 75764054
ECREDIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DALIER, LAURIEL
- 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 ECREDIT?
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
Jacksonville, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
RICHARD S VERMUT
RICHARD S VERMUT ROGERS TOWERS BAILEY JONES & GAY PA1301 RIVERPLACE BLVD STE 1500JACKSONVILLE, FL 32207UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail services, namely a program for providing merchandise refunds through the issuance of debit cards, containing encoded information about the amount of the refund, which may then be applied towards the purchase of other merchandise | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 7, 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. |
| Feb 7, 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. |
| May 17, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 16, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 29, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 13, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 28, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 12, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 28, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 28, 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. |
| Feb 17, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 14, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 11, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 20, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 3, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 17, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 17, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 4, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |