USPTO serial 76317366
E-VISION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- VLCEK, TOMAS V
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - MANAGING ATTORNEY
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 E-VISION?
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.
Douglas R. Bush, Esq.
DOUGLAS R BUSH ESQ ARENT FOX KINTNER PLOTKIN ET AL1050 CONNECTICUT AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Digital cameras; laser printers; scanners; mobile telephones; radio pagers; and peripherals for computer workstations | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 21, 2004 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Dec 17, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 19, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 16, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 27, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 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 16, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |