USPTO serial 75883751
QUOREX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DEFORD, JEFFREY S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 QUOREX?
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.
Joseph R. Baker
JOSEPH R BAKER FISH & RICHARDSON PC12390 EL CAMINO REALSAN DIEGO, CA 92130UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | research and development services for others, medical testing services for others, product design services for others, and consulting services for others, all of the foregoing in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology or medical device industries | ACTIVE | Dec 9, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 24, 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. |
| Jun 24, 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. |
| Nov 16, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 15, 2004 | CNFR | SU - FINAL REFUSAL - WRITTEN | 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. |
| Sep 16, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Feb 24, 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. |
| Feb 12, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 5, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Jul 22, 2003 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 3, 2003 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 8, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 13, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 9, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jul 16, 2002 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| May 13, 2002 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 13, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 8, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 8, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2001 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 5, 2001 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2001 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Oct 17, 2000 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Sep 15, 2000 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 13, 2000 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 12, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 8, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |