USPTO serial 77084659
I3 SYSTEM-ABD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RUTLAND, BARBARA A
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 I3 SYSTEM-ABD?
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.
Jennifer J. Hagan
JENNIFER J. HAGAN THE HAGAN LAW FIRM350 CAMBRIDGE AVE STE 150PALO ALTO, CA 94306-1552UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Ultrasonic medical diagnostic apparatus | ACTIVE | Jul 29, 1990 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 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. |
| May 31, 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. |
| Nov 2, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 2, 2010 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 2, 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. |
| Sep 1, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 1, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 1, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 28, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 28, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 28, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 16, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 16, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 15, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 15, 2008 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Feb 11, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 5, 2008 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 28, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 11, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 11, 2007 | 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. |
| May 15, 2007 | GEAP | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT/PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | — |
| May 15, 2007 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| May 6, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jan 22, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |