USPTO serial 78709349
CURO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GUTTADAURO, JULIE MARIE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 CURO?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Consulting services in the field of user interface products, design and developing services in the filed of user interface products, research services relating to user interface products | ACTIVE | Mar 16, 2000 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 20, 2009 | 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. |
| May 19, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 19, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 19, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 14, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 6, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 1, 2007 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 26, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 26, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 28, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 28, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 11, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 23, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 20, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |