USPTO serial 77632222
YOURPROF
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHISOLM, KEVON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 YOURPROF?
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
La Peche, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
James L. Scott
JAMES L. SCOTT WARNER NORCROSS & JUDD LLP111 LYON ST NW STE 900GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49503-2487UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | PROVIDING ONLINE PRERECORDED AUDIO AND AUDIOVISUAL CONTENT IN THE NATURE OF ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL LECTURES, CLASSES, AND SEMINARS, IN THE FIELDS OF PROFESSIONS AND APPLIED SCIENCES, ARTS, HUMANITIES, SOCIAL SCIENCES, NATURAL SCIENCES, AND FORMAL SCIENCES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 16, 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. |
| Dec 16, 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. |
| May 18, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 25, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 18, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 15, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 15, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 8, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 7, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 7, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 25, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 25, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 23, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 21, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 17, 2009 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 17, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2009 | 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 10, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |