USPTO serial 76115980
VISUALPLEX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CROCKETT, CYNTHIA
- 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 VISUALPLEX?
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.
Susan Schultz Laluk
SUSAN SCHULTZ LALUK BOYLAN BROWN CODE VIGDOR & WILSON LLP2400 CHASE SQROCHESTER, NY 14604UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Provide information technology solutions, information technology infrastructure, computer network-based connectivity, communication, e-commerce, database technology, information and consulting services to the vision care industry Create information and transaction linkages between eye care providers, manufacturers, distributors, insurers and patients including the electronic enablement of vision care services Enable e-commerce product ordering for eye care and ophthalmic products including contact lenses, eyeglasses, spectacles, contact lens solutions, eye care solutions, eye drops, ophthalmic solutions, vision accessories, ophthalmic instruments and equipment | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 22, 2002 | 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 19, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 28, 2001 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 22, 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 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 9, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |