USPTO serial 76091530
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
MARKHAM, ONTARIO L3R 8H3, CA
Markham, CA
BRONDBY, DK
BRONDBY, DK
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Timothy A. French
ROBERT E. PURCELL WALL MARJAMA & BILINSKI, LLP101 SOUTH SALINA STREET4TH FLOORNEW YORK, NY 13202| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Software and hardware for computer communications testing | ABANDONED | Feb 21, 2003 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2005 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | OP.S | OPPOSITION SUSTAINED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | OP.S | OPPOSITION SUSTAINED NO. 999999 | — |
| Mar 16, 2005 | EXAR | TEAS EXPRESS ABANDONMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Dec 20, 2004 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 12, 2004 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Sep 1, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 6, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 6, 2004 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Jun 23, 2004 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | 44DD | SEC. 44(D) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 6, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 9, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 5, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 16, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Jan 31, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 25, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 29, 2000 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |