USPTO serial 78425622
SVA-PRO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHIH, SALLY
- Law office
- TTAB
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 SVA-PRO?
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
Richmond Hill, Ontario, CA
Richmond Hill, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
L. S. VAN LANDINGHAM III
L.S. Van Landingham, III12921 Bridger DriveGermantown, MD 20874UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer software for use in improving security systems through detailed security vulnerability analysis studies | ABANDONED | Sep 16, 2002 |
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 20, 2007 | MAB4 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Dec 20, 2007 | ABN4 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER INTER PARTES DECISION | — |
| Dec 20, 2007 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Oct 19, 2005 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 20, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 31, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 6, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 22, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 22, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 19, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 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. |
| Jan 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. |
| Dec 28, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 2, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |