USPTO serial 76279220
TIMEFRACTUALS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KING, LINDA M
- 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 TIMEFRACTUALS?
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
Orange City, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Christopher J. Day
CHRISTOPHER J DAY LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTOPHER DAY340 E PALM LN STE 282PHOENIX, AZ 85004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 016 | BOOKS IN THE FIELD OF HISTORY UTILIZING A TIME FRACTUALS METHOD TO ANALYZE, ORGANIZE AND DEPICT HISTORICAL DATA | ACTIVE | Mar 25, 2001 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 15, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 3, 2004 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jan 30, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 14, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 7, 2003 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| May 19, 2003 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Apr 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 26, 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. |
| Jun 25, 2002 | 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. |
| Jun 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 6, 2002 | 1.BD | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Feb 28, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 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 26, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |