USPTO serial 76691386
CONFLICT DYNAMICS INTERNATIONAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STIGLITZ, SUSAN R
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 CONFLICT DYNAMICS INTERNATIONAL?
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.
James L. Ackerman
JAMES L. ACKERMAN WADLAND & ACKERMAN2 DUNDEE PARK STE 304ANDOVER, MA 01810-3726UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Public policy research services in the fields of conflict prevention and conflict resolution between and within nations, development and implementation of strategies and policies to alleviate human suffering in conflict and crisis situations, and theoretical and practical aspects of international conflict resolutions | ACTIVE | Mar 25, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 10, 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. |
| Feb 10, 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. |
| Jul 15, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 8, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 8, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 8, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 18, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 22, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 22, 2009 | 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 4, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 25, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 25, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 20, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 20, 2009 | 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. |
| May 20, 2009 | 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. |
| May 7, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 7, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 28, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 27, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 30, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 30, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 28, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 29, 2008 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |