USPTO serial 75982699
IMPACT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ANKRAH, NAAKWAMA S
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 IMPACT?
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.
David E. Stoll
DAVID E STOLL FARELLA BRAUN + MARTEL LLPRUSS BLDG 235 MONTGOMERY STSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | marketing and advertising services, namely, creation of digital advertising messages for others and dissemination of such messages for others via electronic mail; analysis of customer profile information for others in connection with digital marketing campaigns; auditing of customer responses to e-mail messages in connection with digital marketing campaigns | 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 1, 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. |
| Oct 1, 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. |
| Mar 1, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 1, 2007 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 10, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 10, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 18, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 24, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 8, 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. |
| Feb 7, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 14, 2005 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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 14, 2005 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 23, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 18, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 2, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 11, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 26, 2002 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 3, 2002 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 14, 2002 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 14, 2002 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 13, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 6, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 6, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 2, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 14, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 19, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 4, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 19, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |