USPTO serial 78074988
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.
JAMES M. GIBSON
JAMES M GIBSON FITZPATRICK, CELLA, HARPER & SCINTO30 ROCKEFELLER PLAZANEW YORK, NY 10112UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Computer services, namely, hosting, developing, and maintaining web sites for and on behalf of pharmaceutical companies which provide disease management services and patient support; provide news and information to patients, doctors, nurses, and pharmacists about diseases; encourage proper and persistent treatment of diseases; and allow various persons involved in treating a particular disease to track treatment persistence and communicate with each other and with the pharmaceutical company | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 2, 2007 | 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 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 13, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 4, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 24, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 17, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 18, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 16, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 20, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 10, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 21, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 26, 2002 | 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. |
| Aug 26, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 2002 | 1.BA | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM ADDED | — |
| Jul 30, 2002 | 1.AD | SEC. 1(A) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Jul 30, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 5, 2002 | 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. |
| Sep 24, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |