USPTO serial 76313826
THE FINJAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DELANEY, ZHALEH SYBIL
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE UNIT
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with THE FINJAN?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Adriana E. Kierszenbaum Seigel
CAROL DESMOND LAW OFFICE OF JON A DORF. LLPSTE 302740 W BOSTON POST RDMAMARONECK, NY 10543Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | RETAIL GOURMET FOOD STORES; RETAIL BOOK STORE SERVICES; PROVIDING FACILITIES FOR DAYTIME BUSINESS CONFERENCES | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Providing catering services; restaurant services; take-out restaurant services; restaurant services featuring coffee; and cafe services; coffee house services | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Bruderhof Foundation, Inc., The
- Other trademarks owned by Bruderhof Foundation, Inc., The
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named THE FINJAN
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2005 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jan 26, 2005 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jun 22, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 9, 2004 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Dec 16, 2003 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Nov 26, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 3, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2003 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jul 3, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 3, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 27, 2003 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 16, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 3, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 27, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 21, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 21, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 25, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 26, 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. |
| Jan 18, 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. |
| Jan 14, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |