USPTO serial 76417736
INCENTA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WELLS, KELLEY L
- 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 INCENTA?
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
Surrey, British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Charles D. McClung
CHARLES D MCCLUNG CHERNOFF, VILHAUER, MCCLUNG & STENZEL1600 ODS TWR601 S W SECOND AVEPORTLAND, OR 97204-3157Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 016 | Redeemable incentive certificates and vouchers | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | issuing redeemable gift certificates and vouchers which may then be redeemed for goods or services and conducting incentive and loyalty award programs to promote the sale of products and services of others | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 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. |
| Jul 6, 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. |
| Nov 29, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 25, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 3, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 22, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 22, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 7, 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. |
| Sep 17, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |