USPTO serial 76081429
FILAMENT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MULLEN, MARK
- 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 FILAMENT?
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
Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 5T5, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Charles E. Weinstein
JOHN L WELCH FOLEY HOAG & ELIOTONE POST OFFICE SQBOSTON, MA 02109UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Computer consultation in the field of website design and development; computer services, namely, designing and creating websites for others; product development, namely, designing drums for promoting the goods and services of others; and promoting the goods and services of others by preparing and placing advertisements on cd-roms | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 9, 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. |
| Jun 16, 2003 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 2, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 25, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 6, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 5, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 22, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 22, 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. |
| Dec 11, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |