USPTO serial 77668908
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Patrick J. Jennings
Patrick J. Jennings Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman2300 N St., N.W.Washington, DC 20037UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | Medical device for injecting, dosing, measuring and monitoring the injection of cement during medical procedures for the treatment of compression fractures | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Consulting services in the field of testing new products for others, namely, testing of medical devices and conducting clinical trials of medical devices to be used in vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty procedures | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2013 | 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 14, 2013 | 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. |
| Jun 18, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 18, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 16, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 15, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 15, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 14, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 15, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 15, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 15, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 15, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 30, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 17, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 18, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 17, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 17, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 17, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 17, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 13, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 4, 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. |
| May 5, 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. |
| May 5, 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. |
| May 5, 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. |
| May 4, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 17, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Feb 17, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |