USPTO serial 77045280
RUGGEDSERVER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SUAREZ, MARIA VICTORIA
- 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 RUGGEDSERVER?
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
Woodbridge, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Filip A. Kowalewski
Filip A. Kowalewski Siemens Industry, Inc.3333 Old Milton ParkwayAlpharetta, GA 30005UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware; computer software for operating and/or managing computer networks, Ethernet switches, routers, and/or serial devices forming a network; computer software for operating and/or managing communication networks and networking infrastructure: computer software for detecting and recovering from a fault in a communication network; computer software for monitoring the performance and the physical structure of a computer network; computer software for managing and visualizing the performance of a computer network; computer software, namely, an embedded operating system for computers, managed Ethernet switches, routers and/or serial devices servers forming a network; computer software, namely, an operating system for computers, managed Ethernet switches, routers and/or serial device servers connected to a network; computer network communication routers, Ethernet switches and computer switches, gateway routers for use with communication networks, computers and modems; fiber optic cables, connectors and filters; fiber optical network and components therefor; fiber optical Ethernet networks and components therefor; fiber optical networks comprised of hubs, switches and fiber-to-electrical media converters, communication hubs, communication routers and switches having mixed fiber optical and electrical media ports; computer network hubs, switches and routers having fiber optical ports; computer hubs,routers and switches having mixed fiber optical and electrical media ports; fiber optical Ethernet networks comprised of hubs, switches, fiber-to-electrical media converters, serial to Ethernet servers, communication hubs, communication routers, computer hubs, computer network routers, switches and serial to Ethernet servers having mixed fiber optic to electrical media ports, and components therefor; computer network hubs, switches and routers having optical ports and components therefor; computer hubs, routers, switches, serial to Ethernet servers and serial device servers having mixed fiber optic and copper ports; video encoders; fiber optic to cable converters; fiber optical to electrical media converters; serial to Ethernet gateways; serial device servers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 17, 2013 | 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 17, 2013 | 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 25, 2013 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2013 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 19, 2012 | 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 19, 2012 | 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 26, 2012 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 22, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 14, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 22, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 22, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 15, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 28, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 26, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 23, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 21, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 21, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 21, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 6, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 16, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 16, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 2, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 2, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 28, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 8, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 8, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 7, 2009 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 7, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 17, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 29, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 21, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 19, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 19, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| Nov 15, 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. |
| Oct 11, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 29, 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. |
| Mar 28, 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. |
| Mar 20, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 22, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |