USPTO serial 76460914
REACTION DESIGN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GRIFFIN, JAMES
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 REACTION DESIGN?
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.
Michael A. Whittaker
STACY L TAYLOR FOLEY & LARDNER LLPPO BOX 80278SAN DIEGO, CA 92138UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software, namely programs delivered on media such as CD-ROMs and via electronic communications networks for chemical reaction simulations, chemical kinetics simulations, and chemical flow simulations; and user manuals and instructions sold as a unit with the above | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 1997 |
| 041 | training in the use and operation of software for chemical reaction simulations, chemical kinetics simulations, and chemical flow simulations | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 1996 |
| 042 | consultation in the field of modeling chemical reactions, chemical kinetics, and chemical flows; consultation in the field of incorporating software for chemical reaction simulations, chemical kinetics simulations, and chemical flow simulations into other software environments | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 1996 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 23, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 13, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 11, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 16, 2005 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 16, 2005 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Dec 17, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 27, 2004 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2004 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 27, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 27, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 30, 2004 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 10, 2004 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 2, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 2, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 2, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| May 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 28, 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 11, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 1, 2003 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 1, 2003 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 28, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |