USPTO serial 76035971
WWW.NYTIME.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICKLEBURGH, LINDA BOHANNON
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 WWW.NYTIME.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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ROBERT L RISLEY
ROBERT L RISLEY THE LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT L RISLEY790 E COLORADO BLVD 9TH FL PHPASADENA, CA 91101-2193UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | registration of domain names for identification of users on a global computer network | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 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. |
| Apr 22, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 19, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Dec 17, 2003 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jul 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 20, 2003 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Mar 27, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 6, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 6, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 21, 2002 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| May 14, 2002 | 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. |
| Jan 22, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 29, 2001 | 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 24, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 12, 2001 | 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. |
| Feb 7, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 5, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |