USPTO serial 78199117
EXCEDO TECHNOLOGIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEIGLE, KATHERINE CONNOLLY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 EXCEDO TECHNOLOGIES?
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
KIBBUTZ EINAT, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Edward J. Chalfie
EDWARD J CHALFIE LADAS & PARRYSTE 1200224 S MICHIGAN AVECHICAGO, IL 60604Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE IN THE FIELD OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE DEVELOPMENT; INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND SYSTEMS; RENTAL OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE; TRAINING IN THE USE OF COMPUTERS; TECHNICAL CONSULTING SERVICES IN THE FIELD OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; COMPUTER CONSULTING SERVICES IN THE FIELD OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY | 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 27, 2006 | 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 27, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 31, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 31, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 1, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 31, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 24, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 9, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 31, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 24, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 2, 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. |
| Jun 28, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |