USPTO serial 76692762
ICP A HOSE-MCCANN SOLUTION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BOAGNI, MARY
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 ICP A HOSE-MCCANN SOLUTION?
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.
Meyer A. Gross
Meyer A. Gross Ladas & Parry LLP1040 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10018-3738UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Marine shipboard internal communications systems, namely an internet protocol based system integrating public address, general alarm, voice over internet protocol, wireless telephone, closed circuit television and audio/visual entertainment functionality comprising a series of nodes, controllers and endpoints | ACTIVE | — |
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 28, 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 28, 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. |
| Mar 23, 2011 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 23, 2011 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 29, 2011 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2011 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Jan 29, 2011 | 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. |
| Dec 23, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 23, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 2010 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Aug 31, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 23, 2010 | UNDC | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - COURTESY COPY MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 10, 2010 | 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 19, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 19, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 7, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 7, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 6, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 16, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 16, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 12, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 22, 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. |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Dec 15, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 23, 2008 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |