USPTO serial 77098361
LRO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SPILS, CAROL A
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 104 - 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 LRO?
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.
D. Bruce Prout
D. BRUCE PROUT CHRISTIE, PARKER & HALE, LLPPO BOX 7068PASADENA, CA 91109-7068UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | ETHERNET ADAPTERS AND INTEGRATED CIRCUITS FOR ETHERNET APPLICATIONS; COMPUTER HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE FOR USE IN COMPUTER NETWORKS THAT ENABLE THE USE OF MULTIPLE LINKS ON DIFFERENT TYPES OF OPERATING SYSTEMS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 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 26, 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 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 24, 2010 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Sep 29, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 26, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 26, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 19, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 13, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 12, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 12, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 5, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 16, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 16, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 16, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 26, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 26, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 26, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | 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. |
| May 23, 2007 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 23, 2007 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 22, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 7, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |