USPTO serial 75890849
APPSTREET.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SLOAN, CYNTHIA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 APPSTREET.COM?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
DEVLIN EBUSINESS ARCHITECTS INC.
TORONTO, ONTARIO, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Judith L. Grubner
JUDITH L GRUBNER MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLPSTE 2000TWO PRUDENTIAL PLZ 180 N STETSON AVECHICAGO, IL 60601Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | SOFTWARE RENTAL SERVICES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 28, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 28, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 11, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 16, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 16, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 16, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 9, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 1, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 24, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 30, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 30, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 12, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 5, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 1, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 11, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2001 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 15, 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. |
| Jun 8, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |