USPTO serial 76622846
DR. MAC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PEREZ, STEVEN M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 DR. MAC?
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.
RICHARD O. BARTZ
RICHARD O BARTZ BARTZ & BARTZ PA6950 France Ave. SSTE 119EDINA, MN 55435-1983Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Technical support services, namely, troubleshooting of computer and computer networking hardware and software problems in real time via telephone, e-mail and internet | ACTIVE | Jan 10, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2011 | 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 12, 2011 | 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 14, 2011 | 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. |
| Feb 13, 2011 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 24, 2010 | LOPT | LETTER OF PROTEST EVIDENCE FORWARDED | — |
| Aug 24, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 9, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 10, 2010 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 5, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 22, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 17, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 17, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 17, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 26, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 10, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 28, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 25, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Feb 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 25, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 8, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 7, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Jul 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |