USPTO serial 77257226
TOMCAT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STIGLITZ, SUSAN R
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 TOMCAT?
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.
Carl M.R. van der Zandt
PO BOX 1052NEW YORK, NY 10163-1052UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software facilitating business operations, general office and back office functions, financial management, customer and quality management, customs planning and compliance with customs regulations, and internal and external supply chain management | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Development, installation, maintenance and repair of computer software | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 28, 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. |
| Jun 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. |
| Nov 20, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 20, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 20, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 23, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 22, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 22, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 3, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 3, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 2, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 24, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 24, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 24, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 16, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 16, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 16, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 26, 2007 | 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 26, 2007 | 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 26, 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. |
| Nov 26, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 22, 2007 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |