USPTO serial 75925837
PERFORM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRYAN JOHNSON, HELLEN
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with PERFORM?
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.
Mary-Elizabeth Buckles
DIANE MELNICK FROSS, ZELNICK, LEHRMAN & ZISSU866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | CONSULTING SERVICES FOR IMPLEMENTING, MONITORING, AND CONTROLLING SALES, DELIVERY, MANAGEMENT, AND OVERALL QUALITY FOR ALL TYPES OF PROGRAMS, PROJECTS, AND 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 24, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 15, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 26, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Oct 30, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 7, 2002 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 3, 2002 | 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. |
| Jun 14, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 6, 2002 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jun 5, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 19, 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. |
| Apr 11, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 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. |
| Aug 29, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 11, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 8, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 26, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |