USPTO serial 76030532
E2
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- THOMPSON, LAVERNE
- 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 E2?
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.
SCOTT A OUELLETTE
TOBY H KUSMER MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP28 STATE STBOSTON, MA 02109UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Computerized business marketing services for providers of goods and services, namely, providing on-line retrieval, analysis, and organization of data generated by providers of goods and services, and potential customers of goods and services to enable providers of goods and services to advertise and market their goods and services | ACTIVE | May 3, 1999 |
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 6, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Nov 23, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 23, 2004 | 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 5, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 20, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 15, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 5, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 23, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 20, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 29, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 22, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 2000 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 21, 2000 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |