USPTO serial 76538687
3D MACHINE VISION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELLO, ZACK
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - DOCKET CLERK
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 3D MACHINE VISION?
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.
Paul Smith
PAUL SMITH SMITHS IP1367 West BroadwaySUITE 400Vancouver, B.C., V6H4A7Goods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2016 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 25, 2016 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 11, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 3, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 3, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 9, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 19, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 19, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 21, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 21, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 9, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | 44DD | SEC. 44(D) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 21, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Feb 21, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 18, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 18, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |