USPTO serial 76243502
ADVISOR TECHNOLOGIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ALI, STEPHANIE MARIE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 ADVISOR TECHNOLOGIES?
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
Slough, Berkshire SL1 2ER, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lucy B. Arant
LUCY B ARANT RUSS AUGUST KABAT & KENT12424 WILSHIRE BLVD FL 12LOS ANGELES, CA 90025-1052UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER HARDWARE AND COMPUTER PERIPHERAL DEVICES, COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR USE IN MONITORING DATABASE SECURITY SYSTEMS FOR THE INTERNET AND ELECTRONIC BUSINESS BY PREVENTING AND/OR DETECTING DATABASE INTRUSION IN THE FIELD OF INTERNET AND ELECTRONIC BUSINESS SECURITY | 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 3, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 10, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 2, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 2, 2005 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jan 28, 2005 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 27, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 17, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 25, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 23, 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. |
| Aug 15, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 30, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |