USPTO serial 76300968
EXPRESSOLUTIONS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STIGLITZ, SUSAN R
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 EXPRESSOLUTIONS?
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
Burlington, Ontario L7L 6G4, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Adam S. Weiss
ADAM S WEISS SCHIFF HARDIN & WAITEP O BOX 06079CHICAGO, IL 60606-0079UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software applications for used to automate the financing of business-to-business sales transactions in the financial services industry | 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 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. |
| Feb 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. |
| Jul 23, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 12, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 29, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 16, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 16, 2003 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Jan 16, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 12, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 29, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 8, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 8, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 8, 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. |
| Nov 6, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 23, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |