USPTO serial 85236036
CHOROIDOSCOPE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MORRIS, KRISTINA KLOIBER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 CHOROIDOSCOPE?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
L. S. VanLandingham III
12921 BRIDGER DRGERMANTOWN, MD 20874-3992UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 010 | medical devices in the nature of an ocular pathology management system that integrates advanced multi-spectral imaging hardware with analytic software for detection, display, assessment and management of eye pathologies | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 29, 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. |
| Dec 27, 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. |
| May 31, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 31, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 31, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 12, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 22, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 27, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 27, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 27, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 25, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 1, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 30, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 30, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 30, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 8, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 8, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 3, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 16, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 10, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 13, 2011 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 13, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 3, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 10, 2011 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 8, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 9, 2011 | 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. |
| May 9, 2011 | 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. |
| May 9, 2011 | 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. |
| May 6, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 10, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Feb 10, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |