USPTO serial 76018564
DIGITAL COAST 100
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 DIGITAL COAST 100?
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.
KENNETH TABACHNICK
KENNETH TABACHNICK LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH TABACHNICK33 W 93RD ST STE 3KNEW YORK, NY 10025UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Publishing a magazine in print and electronic form featuring business and trade information in the area of electronic and digital communication and the development of current and new business models and featuring the top one hundred Internet executives in Southern California area | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 1, 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 1, 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. |
| Oct 20, 2004 | CNRU | DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | AAUD | AMENDMENT OF ALLEGED USE DISAPPROVED | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 9, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 7, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 4, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 19, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 5, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 4, 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 15, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 9, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 7, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |