USPTO serial 78320265
GENETIC MARKETING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICKLEBURGH, LINDA BOHANNON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 GENETIC MARKETING?
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
Broomfield, CO
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Stephen R. Soden
STEPHEN R SODEN SODEN & STEINBERGER, LLPSTE 1710550 W CTR STSAN DIEGO, CA 92101Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Internet marketing services namely software services for business marketing opimization | ACTIVE | Oct 29, 2003 |
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 4, 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. |
| Aug 4, 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. |
| Jan 6, 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. |
| Jan 6, 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. |
| Nov 30, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| May 24, 2004 | 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. |
| May 24, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 21, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |