USPTO serial 76594043
EVERCOM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRACEY, KAREN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 EVERCOM?
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.
David H. Tannenbaum
DAVID H TANNENBAUM FULBRIGHT & JAWORSKI LLP2200 ROSS AVE STE 2800DALLAS, TX 75201UNITED STATESGoods 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 25, 2011 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Aug 11, 2010 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| May 6, 2010 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Oct 8, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Oct 8, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Oct 8, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Apr 18, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 18, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 6, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Sep 6, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Aug 22, 2005 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Aug 12, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 8, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 28, 2005 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 28, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 16, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | CPEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 2004 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 27, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 10, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |