USPTO serial 76288370
BIG PICTURE TECHNOLOGY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SWAIN, MICHELE LYNN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 BIG PICTURE TECHNOLOGY?
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
RA'ANANA, IL
THALES CONTACT SOLUTIONS LIMITED
Bracknell, Berkshire RG12 1RG, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
RACHEL BLUE
RACHEL BLUE DOERNER, SAUNDERS, DANIEL & ANDERSON LLP320 S BOSTON AVE STE 500TULSA, OK 74103-3725UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | performance management software for use in call centers and contact centers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 18, 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. |
| Nov 18, 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. |
| Apr 19, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 10, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 21, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 17, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 17, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 14, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 9, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 29, 2002 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| May 23, 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. |
| Sep 19, 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 4, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |