USPTO serial 76269918
INTEGRATED RETURN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VERHOSEK, WILLIAM T
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with INTEGRATED RETURN?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
NANETTE M. NORTON
NANETTE M NORTON BRINKS HOFER GILSON & LIONEP O BOX 10395CHICAGO, IL 60610UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | Insurance services, namely, risk management, managed health care, claims adjustment, disability and case management, management of workers compensation claims, short and long term disability claims, salary continuation and family medical leave act claims, and consulting services related thereto; insurance claim administering and processing | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company
- Other trademarks owned by Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company
- Other trademarks in Class 036
- Similar marks named INTEGRATED RETURN
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2005 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jan 26, 2005 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Aug 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 30, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 23, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2004 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Sep 23, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 23, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2003 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Mar 25, 2003 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Dec 31, 2002 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Dec 11, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 30, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 30, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 29, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 3, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 3, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 26, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 27, 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. |
| Jun 27, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 10, 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 7, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |