USPTO serial 78402613
TRANSTRAK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STIGLITZ, SUSAN R
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 TRANSTRAK?
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.
Gregory S. Smith
GREGORY S SMITH LAVA GROUP LAW BY SMITH & FROHWEINTWO RAVINIA DR STE 790ATLANTA, GA 30346UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Portable electronic devices, namely GPS system and/or computer hardware for monitoring and tracking the location of vehicles, individuals and assets in the nature of motorized vehicles, non-motorized vehicles, maritime vessels, aircraft, human beings and portable or moveable objects | ACTIVE | Oct 1, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 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. |
| Jul 26, 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. |
| Dec 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 6, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 14, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 14, 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. |
| Feb 25, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 13, 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. |
| Nov 17, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 17, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| Nov 16, 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. |
| Nov 8, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 15, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 15, 2004 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 26, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |