USPTO serial 85031024
WHO'S TALKING
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GARTNER, JOHN M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - 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 WHO'S TALKING?
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
Palo Alto, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Beth M. Goldman
BETH M. GOLDMAN ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP4 PARK PLZ STE 1600IRVINE, CA 92614-2558UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Providing an online interactive website aggregating and organizing information relating to seminars, symposiums, meetings, discussions, lectures, readings, talks, workshops, conferences, performances, and exhibitions; providing information, namely, event detail, compilations and recommendations relating to seminars, symposiums, meetings, discussions, lectures, readings, talks, workshops, conferences, performances, and exhibitions using a global computer network | ACTIVE | Jan 17, 2010 |
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 1, 2011 | 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. |
| Apr 1, 2011 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2010 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Aug 25, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 17, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 12, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| May 11, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |