USPTO serial 75770773
EXPERT PRACTICE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SPRUILL, DARRYL M
- 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 EXPERT PRACTICE?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | An application service provider, namely, developing computer software programs for physicians and other health care professionals, in small to medium-sized practices and hosting such software applications on a global computer network, allowing such physicians and health care professionals to operate with the efficiencies of larger-scale offices | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 17, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 22, 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Aug 4, 2005 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 5, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 4, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 15, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 27, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 29, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 15, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Nov 24, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |