USPTO serial 76511421
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
Petach Tikva 49517, IL
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Harold L. Novick
HAROLD L NOVICK NATH & ASSOCIATES PLLC112 S W STALEXANDRIA, VA 22314UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Telecommunication equipment, namely computer software, computer hardware and computer peripherals for providing management and control, including the collection, processing and provision of data and information from telecommunication networks, whose primary function is civilian and is not primarily used for military, national security or homeland defense purposes | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 16, 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. |
| May 16, 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. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 28, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 22, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | 1.BD | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 22, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 22, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 14, 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. |
| Sep 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |