USPTO serial 76159187
CORE WIRELESS ENGINE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EDWARDS, ALICIA COLLINS
- 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 CORE WIRELESS ENGINE?
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
Richmond, British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
MARLENE J WILLIAMS
MARLENE J WILLIAMS THELEN REID & PRIEST LLPP O BOX 190187SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94119-0187UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware, namely, wireless data modems for use in mobile computing devices from personal digital assistants to laptops | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 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. |
| Jan 26, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 24, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 6, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 12, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 5, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 24, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 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. |
| Mar 13, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 2, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |