USPTO serial 78240951
VIRTUAL DEBIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARROLL, DORITT
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 VIRTUAL DEBIT?
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
Oakville, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark B. Eisen
MARK B EISEN DIMOCK STRATTON CLARIZIO TORONTO; ONC - ONTARIOM5H 3R3STE 3202 BOX 102 20 QUEEN ST WES,Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | debit cards, magnetically coded; bank cards, magnetically coded; automated teller machine cards, magnetically coded; Internet credit cards, magnetically coded; Internet debit cards, magnetically coded; credit cards, magnetically coded | ACTIVE | — |
| 036 | credit card services; credit services, namely, extending credit in Internet transactions based on buyer authentication; debit card services; electronic debit transaction services; commercial and consumer lending services; financial clearing house services; banking services including financial and foreign currency exchange services; and credit inquiry and consultation services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 11, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 21, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 20, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 19, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 20, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 27, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 27, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 19, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 16, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 7, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 7, 2004 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 8, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 10, 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. |
| Oct 10, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |