USPTO serial 76308671
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
M. Jeannette Clark
M JEANNETTE CLARK SEED, MACKALL & COLE LLP1332 ANACAPA ST STE 200SANTA BARBARA, CA 93120-2578UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, NAMELY, THE ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION OF VOICE AND DATA NOT INCLUDING RADIO BROADCASTING SERVICES; TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES, NAMELY, LOCAL, LONG DISTANCE, INTERNATIONAL AND TOLL FREE TELEPHONE COMMUNICATION SERVICES; AUTOMATED VOICE RESPONSE TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES, NAMELY, VOICE-ACTIVATED RESPONSE SERVICES; VOICE PROCESSING SERVICES, NAMELY, ELECTRONIC AND DIGITAL TRANSMISSION OF VOICE, CALL ROUTING SERVICES; PRIVATE LINE SERVICES, NAMELY, PROVIDING PRIVATE LINE FRAME RELAY CONNECTIVITY SERVICES FOR DATA TRANSFER; FRAME RELAY SERVICE, NAMELY, PROVIDING FRAME RELAY CONNECTIVITY SERVICES FOR DATA TRANSFER; TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICE, NAMELY, ISDN SERVICES; ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION OF MESSAGES AND DATA VIA FACSIMILE, ELECTRONIC STORE-AND-FORWARD MESSAGING VIA TELEPHONE, FACSIMILE, PAGER AND E-MAIL; PROVIDING FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR AUDIO CONFERENCING, NETWORK CONFERENCING SERVICES, NAMELY, INTERNET CONFERENCING SERVICES | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 5, 2003 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 28, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 3, 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. |
| Oct 7, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 26, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 11, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 17, 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 29, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |