USPTO serial 77634249
SCOREPOINT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICHELI, ANGELA M
- 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 SCOREPOINT?
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
Richmond Hill, Ontario, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | (Based on Intent to Use) Computer software for strategic performance management; (Based on 44(d) Priority Application) Computer software for strategic performance management | 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 26, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 24, 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 23, 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. |
| Oct 21, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 17, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 6, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 6, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 5, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 4, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 22, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 11, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 20, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Dec 19, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |