USPTO serial 76317478
AXS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MADDEN, ANNE
- 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 AXS?
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
Spectrum Signal Processing Inc.
Burnaby, British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jane Eckels
JANE ECKELS DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE1501 4TH AVE STE 2600SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer hardware for voice and packet processing; computer software for voice and packet processing | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 27, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 18, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 7, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 7, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 25, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 22, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 26, 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. |
| Dec 10, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |