USPTO serial 76198048
PREFUNDING TOOLS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LEE, DOUGLAS
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 PREFUNDING TOOLS?
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
Paulshof, Gauteng, ZA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Laurel V. Dineff
LAUREL V DINEFF DINEFF TRADEMARK LAW LIMITED160 N WACKER DRCHICAGO, IL 60606UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | Medical insurance brokerage and consultation; insurance actuarial services; financial and retirement planning; financial and insurance information provided by electronic means | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 23, 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. |
| Dec 6, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 24, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 24, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 7, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 10, 2003 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Sep 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 25, 2003 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 18, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 29, 2003 | 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. |
| Nov 8, 2002 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 29, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 31, 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. |
| May 25, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |