USPTO serial 85185307
VOYEUR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHOSID, ROBIN S
- 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 VOYEUR?
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
Fredericton, N.B., CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Fay O'Brien
Fay O'Brien O'Brien TM Services Inc.688 Tweedsmuir AvenueOTTAWA, ONTARIO, K1Z5P6CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Non-destructive testing computer hardware and software, for use in obtaining tomograms through the process of computed tomography using reflected, scattered and/or transmitted waves and/or particles; computer software for producing diagnostic information from inspection data; computer software for the recording, transmission, organization, storage and presentation of inspection data and related diagnostic information from computed tomography, ultrasonic, radiography, eddy current, ground penetrating radar, thermography, photography or magnetic resonance imaging, namely, wave or particle sensors, signal processors and encoding and decoding apparatus; data transfer systems, namely, transfer of data by telecommunications in the field of non-destructive testing; servers for data processing and storage computers, and user interface software for presentation of interactive inspection information, all for use in the field of non-medical, non-destructive testing and examination | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 24, 2016 | 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 24, 2016 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 28, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 28, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 2, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 25, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 25, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 25, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 25, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 18, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 18, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 31, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 25, 2015 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| May 25, 2015 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 30, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 29, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 29, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 28, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 12, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 29, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 29, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 20, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 15, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 10, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 10, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 3, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 26, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 23, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 23, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 23, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 13, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 29, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 29, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 29, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 18, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 27, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 27, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 27, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 23, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 10, 2012 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 20, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 29, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 29, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 14, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 9, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2011 | 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. |
| Mar 4, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 1, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 29, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |