USPTO serial 77449030
TICKET ROUTE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SCHRODY, ALLISON PAIGE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 TICKET ROUTE?
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
Montreal, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lawrence E. Abelman
LAWRENCE E. ABELMAN ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 THIRD AVENUENEW YORK, NY 10017-5621UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Operating an online interactive marketplace allowing sellers and buyers to exchange tickets for sporting, musical, cultural and other entertainment events | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 16, 2012 | 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. |
| Feb 16, 2012 | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2011 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 21, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 5, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 4, 2011 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 1, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 17, 2010 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 10, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 8, 2010 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 8, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 8, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 8, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2010 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 8, 2010 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 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. |
| Jan 27, 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. |
| Jul 1, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 15, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 15, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 12, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 11, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 11, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 28, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 6, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 5, 2008 | 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. |
| Jul 28, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 18, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |