USPTO serial 78704012
CERTIFIED CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY PROFESSIONAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHANOSKI, JOANNA MARIE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 CERTIFIED CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY PROFESSIONAL?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Christian D. Stewart
CHRISTIAN D STEWART LAW OFFICE OF CHRIS STEWART PC301 S POLK ST STE 700AMARILLO, TX 79101UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| B | Certification for security individuals working in critical infrastructure protection roles | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Critical Infrastructure Institute, Inc. (Canada)
- Other trademarks owned by Critical Infrastructure Institute, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class B
- Similar marks named CERTIFIED CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SECURITY PROFESSIONAL
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 2006 | 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 17, 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. |
| Sep 5, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 21, 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. |
| Mar 21, 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. |
| Mar 16, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |