USPTO serial 78312371
MAPCAD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EVANKO, PATRICIA MALESARDI
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with MAPCAD?
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
Pleasant Hill, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeffrey H. Greger
JEFFREY H GREGER LOWE HAUPTMAN GILMAN BERNER1700 DIAGONAL RD STE 300ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for professionals in the field of civil engineering excluding software used in drafting and mapping in the field of photogrammetry | ACTIVE | Apr 1, 1999 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 14, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 9, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 11, 2006 | EXAR | EXPARTE APPEAL AFFIRMED/REVERSED IN PART | — |
| Oct 21, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 21, 2005 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 25, 2005 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| May 25, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| May 10, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 9, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 9, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 2, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 2, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 4, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Nov 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 28, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 20, 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. |
| Mar 18, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 4, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |