USPTO serial 78363279
EPRM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STIGLITZ, SUSAN R
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 EPRM?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
LAWRENCE I LERNER
LAWRENCE I LERNER LERNER DAVID LITTENBERG ET AL600 S AVE WWESTFIELD, NJ 07090UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Direct marketing advertising to patients on behalf of pharmaceutical manufacturing companies | 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 15, 2008 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jan 15, 2008 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jul 5, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 22, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 19, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 19, 2006 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Jun 27, 2006 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Jun 7, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 9, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 5, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 25, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 29, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Mar 13, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 23, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 6, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 2, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 3, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 28, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 23, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 23, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 30, 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. |
| Mar 30, 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. |
| Aug 27, 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. |
| Aug 27, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 13, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |