USPTO serial 78206336
FP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- THOMPSON, HEATHER
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 FP?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Mississauga, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Gregory P. Gulia
GREGORY P GULIA DUANE MORRIS LLP380 LEXINGTON AVENEW YORK NY, 10168U.S. ARMYGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software, namely security enhanced and hardened patches, firewall software, privacy software, Internet security software, Internet and worldwide-web based interface software, enterprise software, intrusion detection software and anti-virus software. | INACTIVE - INSUFFICIENT FEE RECEIVED | — |
| 042 | Managed services, namely the provision of services required to create, manage and maintain information technology infrastructure and information technology applications for public and private use; the provision of data, application and system protective services, risk assessment and management strategies, services related to reduction of security exposure, increasing data integrity and confidentiality, implementation of virtual private networks, and hardening and enhancement of software and server security patches, and the provision of disaster recovery services, namely data and application restoration and hardware replacement; computer outsourcing services; software design and customization services | ACTIVE | Jul 1, 2002 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 3, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| May 17, 2006 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Feb 7, 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. |
| Feb 7, 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. |
| Jul 12, 2005 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Jun 30, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 20, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 20, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 26, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 17, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 6, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 8, 2003 | 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 8, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |