USPTO serial 76039542
FUNCTIONAL INTELLIGENCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHARLON, BARNEY
- 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 FUNCTIONAL INTELLIGENCE?
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
Tinton Falls, NJ
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael M. Geoffrey
MICHAEL M GEOFFREY GARDNER, CARTON & DOUGLAS321 N CLARK ST STE 3400CHICAGO, IL 60610UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | First aid kits | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6, 2003 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 5, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 30, 2002 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Aug 5, 2002 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 28, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 17, 2002 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 11, 2002 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Apr 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 8, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Aug 16, 2001 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 30, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 20, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 20, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 18, 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. |
| Oct 10, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 25, 2000 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |