USPTO serial 78059207
ZIAD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LE, KHANH M
- 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 ZIAD?
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
San Jose, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
K. ALISON DE RUNTZ
K ALISON DE RUNTZ PARSONS HSUE & DE RUNTZ LLPSTE 1800655 MONTGOMERY STSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Integrated circuits; multi-protocol microprocessors for network access; microprocessors for integration of voice, video and data; microprocessors for networks; microprocessors for voice-over internet protocol systems; microprocessors for voice-over digital subscriber line systems; computer network routers; microprocessors for telecommunication gateways; switches; support tools for microprocessors, namely, evaluation boards, assemblers, linkers, compilers and debuggers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 11, 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 31, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 10, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 22, 2002 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Mar 1, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 14, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 23, 2001 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 30, 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. |
| Jul 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |