USPTO serial 75861866
PROPHET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GOODMAN, WENDY BETH
- 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 PROPHET?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jennifer A. O? Malley,
ROBERT J DRISCOLL ESQ DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP25TH FL1740 BROADWAYNEW YORK, NY 10019Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER SOFTWARE USED TO ANALYZE MEDIA, MARKETING AND CONSUMER DATA | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 8, 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. |
| Aug 21, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 20, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| May 23, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 9, 2002 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Apr 24, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 9, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 9, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 16, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 21, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Nov 3, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 3, 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. |
| Apr 27, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 3, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 3, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |