USPTO serial 78213375
POLK DIRECTORIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- JOHNSON, AISHA CLARKE
- 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 POLK DIRECTORIES?
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.
Roberta L. Christensen
ROBERTA L CHRISTENSEN KOLEY JESSEN PC1125 S 103 ST STE 800 ONE PACIFIC PLOMAHA NE, 68124U.S. ARMYGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Geographic-specific directory information pre-recorded on digital media, namely, CD-ROMs, DVDs and computer disks, used for reference and marketing purposes | ACTIVE | Nov 6, 2001 |
| 016 | Printed geographic-specific directories containing information for reference and marketing purposes | ACTIVE | Nov 15, 2001 |
| 035 | Providing geographic-specific directory information for reference and marketing purposes via a global computer network | ACTIVE | Jan 20, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Sep 28, 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. |
| Feb 22, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 22, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 22, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 17, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 12, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 16, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 5, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 31, 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 31, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 19, 2003 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 19, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 13, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |