USPTO serial 78384439
ASCENT WORKZONE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FIRST, VIVIAN M
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 ASCENT WORKZONE?
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.
Charles E. Weinstein, Esq.
CHARLES E WEINSTEIN ESQ FOLEY HOAG LLP155 SEAPORT BLVDBOSTON, MA 02210UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for determining staffing needs for task assignments; generating staffing plans for task assignments; scheduling job shifts; determining the number of workers needed for each job shift; enabling workers to bid for and trade job shifts on line; creating specific personnel rosters for job shifts; allocating personnel and equipment to task assignments; notifying personnel of task assignments and changes thereto | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| May 10, 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. |
| May 10, 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. |
| May 2, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 2, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 14, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 14, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 31, 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. |
| Mar 31, 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. |
| Sep 27, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 27, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 29, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |