USPTO serial 76697939
INTEGRATED GOLF PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FROMM, MARTHA L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 INTEGRATED GOLF PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SYSTEM?
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.
Peter Workin
PETER WORKIN Attorney at Law7500 SAN FELIPE ST STE 750HOUSTON, TX 77063-1789UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer software for use in golf clubs or golf course systems management, namely, software for coordinating and organizing tee time management, golf handicapping and organizing and conducting golf tournaments | ACTIVE | Jan 19, 1997 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 25, 2010 | 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. |
| Oct 25, 2010 | 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 29, 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. |
| Mar 26, 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. |
| Mar 4, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 4, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 25, 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. |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 17, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 27, 2009 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jun 23, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |