USPTO serial 76387578
EVIDENCE-BASED DECISIONS FOR HEALTHCARE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ESTRADA, LINDA M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 EVIDENCE-BASED DECISIONS FOR HEALTHCARE?
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.
Sheila M. Riley, Esq.
SHEILA M RILEY REYNOLDS CASAS & RILEY LLPONE FIRST ST STE 2LOS ALTOS, CA 94022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | consulting and business management services namely, assisting hospitals and health care facilities to increase efficiency by collecting, evaluating, maintaining a database of, and reporting information concerning patient classification and staff utilization and workload | ACTIVE | May 1, 1999 |
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 24, 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 23, 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 19, 2004 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 13, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 19, 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 18, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 22, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 16, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 2003 | 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 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 29, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 29, 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. |
| Jul 24, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |