USPTO serial 76095612
ONE CHARGE CARD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AXILBUND, MELVIN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 ONE CHARGE CARD?
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.
Adrienne L. White
ADRIENNE L WHITE BURNS, DOANE, SWECKER & MATHISPOST OFFICE BOX 1404ALEXANDRIA, VA 22313-1404UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | FINANCIAL SERVICES, INCLUDING, CREDIT, DEBIT AND CHARGE CARD BILL PAYMENT, CREDIT, DEBIT AND CHANGE CARD SERVICES, CREDIT, DEBIT AND CHARGE CARD TRANSACTION PROCESSING SERVICES, CREDIT, DEBIT AND CHARGE CARD VERIFICATION SERVICES, COMPUTERIZED BANKING SERVICES, AND COMPUTERIZED FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES, ETC. | 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 22, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 26, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 11, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 22, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 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 24, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 10, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |