USPTO serial 76287428
SEVA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MANDIR, FREDERICK
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 SEVA?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CHRISTOPHER M. TURK
CHRISTOPHER M TURK BLANK ROME COMISKY & MCCAULEY1 LOGAN SQ FL 3PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-6998UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | DIRECT CUSTOMER CARE CALL CENTER SERVICES, NAMELY, CUSTOMER CARE SERVICES PROVIDED ON BE HALF OF COMPANIES IN THE TRAVEL INDUSTRY, HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY, FINANCIAL SERVICES INDUSTRY, AND OTHER FIELDS | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Customer service consultation, namely, consulting in the field of customer care services, provided to companies in the travel industry, health care industry, financial services industry, and other fields | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 28, 2004 | 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 1, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 25, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 16, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 4, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 2, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 23, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 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. |
| Sep 5, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 4, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |