USPTO serial 78425577
VALUEQUEST
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MACIOL II, EUGENE VALENTINE-JO
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 VALUEQUEST?
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
Louisville, KY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Amy B. Berge
AMY B BERGE GREENEBAUM DOLL & MCDONALD PLLC101 S FIFTH ST STE 3300NATIONAL CITY TWRLOUISVILLE, KY 40202Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | providing sales and marketing data and data analysis to manufacturers and suppliers of pharmaceutical products and health care products and supplies | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9, 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. |
| Oct 9, 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. |
| Jan 24, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2007 | 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 24, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 31, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 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. |
| Jun 28, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 2, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |