USPTO serial 78060635
MATRIX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SPRUILL, DARRYL M
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 MATRIX?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
B. Parker Livingston, Jr.
B PARKER LIVINGSTON JR BURNS, DOANE, SWECKER & MATHIS, LLPP O BOX 1404ALEXANDRIA, VA 22313-1404UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Photographic, cinematographic, optical apparatus; apparatus for recording, transmission or reproduction of images; magnetic date carriers, recording discs, data processing equipment and computers when full featured graphics compositing software and computer hardware solutions in connection therewith; computer software used for creating complex special effects for film, commercials, broadcast shows, multimedia and wed presentation, etc. | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Graphics processing | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 25, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 21, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 27, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 30, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 3, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 3, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 2, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 26, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 13, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 13, 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. |
| Aug 11, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 7, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |