USPTO serial 78585539
BIDFLY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHOE, KELLY
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 BIDFLY?
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
Sherman Oaks, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Alina Landver
ALINA LANDVER BIDFLY INC14606 SUTTON STSHERMAN OAKS, CA 91403UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Online services, namely, operating secure on-line marketplace for sellers of goods and services" 'organization of secure internet auctions," 'promoting the goods and services of others by means of operating a secure on-line shopping mall with links to the retail web sites of others" and 'providing a secure online community bulletin board for trade in goods and services along third parties | ACTIVE | Aug 15, 2005 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 19, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 6, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 6, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 4, 2005 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Oct 4, 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 29, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 18, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| May 19, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |