USPTO serial 76673134
RQST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAITO, KIM
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 RQST?
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.
Bruce Piontkowski
BRUCE PIOTKOWSKI TINGLEY PIONTKOWSKI LLP10 ALMADEM BLVD STE 430SAN JOSE, CA 95113UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Organizational services for business purposes | ACTIVE | Nov 2, 2010 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2012 | 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 24, 2012 | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2011 | 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 14, 2011 | CNFR | SU - 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. |
| Aug 11, 2011 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 11, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 28, 2011 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 31, 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. |
| Jan 29, 2011 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Jan 21, 2011 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 5, 2011 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jan 5, 2011 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 12, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2010 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 6, 2010 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 19, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2010 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| May 17, 2010 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| May 17, 2010 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 17, 2010 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2010 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Mar 22, 2010 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Feb 19, 2010 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 13, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Mar 10, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 6, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 18, 2009 | INCE | ITU OFFICE ACTION ISSUED FOR EXTENSION REQUEST | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 29, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 19, 2008 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Nov 27, 2007 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Nov 7, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 24, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 19, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 19, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 18, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 12, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 12, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 25, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 14, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 14, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |