USPTO serial 78385488
CONVENE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BROMAGHIM, PETER
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 CONVENE?
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
Pleasanton, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John C. Cain
JOHN C CAIN WONG CABELLO20333 SH 249 STE 600HOUSTON, TX 77070UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Global communications network server applications software for scheduling time of conference, number of conference participants and length of conference, for controlling various capacities of conference participants, namely, ability to limit participation, and mute and disconnect participants, for administering duration and cost of conference calls and for database interfacing; conference equipment comprising digital signal processor cards, network interface cards, chassis and server computers; documented application program interface software enabling users to customize the interface so that the goods operate in conjunction with end user electronic mail schedulers and web browsers; and platform applications software for computer telephony applications | 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 16, 2007 | 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 16, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 19, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 9, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 9, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 8, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 30, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 31, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 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. |
| Sep 27, 2004 | 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 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 30, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |