USPTO serial 78723174
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
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.
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.
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Barry F. Soalt
Barry F. Soalt, Procopio Cory Hargreaves & Savitch LLP525 B Street, Ste. 2200San Diego, CA 92101UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 016 | Publications, namely, books, pamphlets and newsletters in the fields of accelerated teaching methods, learning skills, and life skills, effective learning environments, and effective training methods; posters | ACTIVE | Dec 31, 2004 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 28, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 28, 2008 | 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 31, 2008 | GSPS | NOTIFICATION OF SU - PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 31, 2008 | GSPR | SU - PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 31, 2008 | SPRA | SU - PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 25, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Jun 29, 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. |
| Jun 29, 2007 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Jun 27, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 27, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 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. |
| Dec 18, 2006 | CNRT | SU - 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 16, 2006 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Sep 12, 2006 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Jun 20, 2006 | 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. |
| May 31, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 2, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 21, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 18, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 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. |
| Apr 11, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 11, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 3, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 4, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |