USPTO serial 78049602
INROOM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LOUGHRAN, BARBARA
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 INROOM?
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
LAS VEGAS, NV
las vegas, NV
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
STEVEN A. GIBSON
STEVEN A GIBSON SANTORO DRIGGS WALCH KEARNEY, ET AL400 S 4TH ST 3RD FLLAS VEGAS, NV 89101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | providing high speed access to area networks and a global computer information network | ACTIVE | Sep 8, 1999 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 30, 2003 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2003 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2003 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Dec 10, 2002 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 12, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 2002 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| May 20, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 2, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 16, 2002 | 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. |
| Aug 1, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 28, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |