USPTO serial 85036912
TIME WELL SPENT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RUTLAND, BARBARA A
- 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 TIME WELL SPENT?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
London, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Oscar L. Alcantara
OSCAR L. ALCANTARA GOLDBERG KOHN LTD.55 E MONROE ST STE 3300CHICAGO, IL 60603-5792UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | (Based on Intent to Use) Computer software for enabling people or organizations to track and record employee attendance and time on the job (Based on 44(d) Priority Application) Computer software for enabling people or organizations to track and record employee attendance and time on the job | 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 24, 2014 | 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. |
| Mar 22, 2014 | 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 23, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 15, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 15, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 15, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 15, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 27, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 27, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 24, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 5, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 2, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 2, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 8, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 22, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 7, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 23, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 23, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 23, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 20, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 18, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 15, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |