USPTO serial 75768608
VIEWPOINT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BEVERLY, JOSETTE MICHELLE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 VIEWPOINT?
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
Petach Tikva 49130, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Brian J McNamara
BRIAN J MCNAMARA FOLEY & LARDNFRSTE 500 3000 K ST N WP O BOX 25696WASHINGTON, DC 20007-8696Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Telecommunication equipment, namely, computers and computer peripherals for monitoring, measuring, analyzing, managing and reporting any extractable information from telecommunication networks and switches | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 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. |
| May 12, 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. |
| Oct 14, 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. |
| Oct 13, 2004 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 27, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 16, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 20, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 12, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 16, 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 28, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 30, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 29, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |