USPTO serial 75799650
ACTIVE VISUAL SYSTEM (AVS)
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VANSTON, KATHY
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 ACTIVE VISUAL SYSTEM (AVS)?
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.
MORRIS G DYNER, ESQ.
MORRIS G DYNER ESQ FISCHEL & KAHN, LTD190 S LASALLE ST STE 2850CHICAGO, IL 60603UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for use in facility management for (a) space utilization, (b) property, maintenance and asbestos management, (c) monitoring building compliance with legal requirements pertaining to the disabled, (d) medical gas, electrical, HACK, plumbing, communication and life safety systems, (e) environmental services,and (f) facility condition assessment | ACTIVE | Sep 1, 1997 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 29, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 17, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 17, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 24, 2002 | 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. |
| Aug 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 26, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 9, 2002 | 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 28, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 9, 2002 | 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. |
| Jan 31, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 13, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 18, 2001 | 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 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 10, 2001 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 9, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 21, 2000 | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 13, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 27, 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. |
| Mar 9, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 10, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |