USPTO serial 85432625
DMR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHUO, EMILY M
- 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 DMR?
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
20131 Milan (MI), IT
20129 MILAN, IT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael A. Grow
Michael A. Grow ARENT FOX LLP1717 K STREET, NWWASHINGTON, DC 20036-5342UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Software for the digitization and collection of data, information, images | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Sep 10, 2013 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Sep 10, 2013 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Aug 19, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 19, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 4, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 19, 2013 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 19, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 14, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 3, 2012 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Aug 6, 2012 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 3, 2012 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 3, 2012 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 2, 2012 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 2, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 19, 2012 | 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 19, 2012 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 19, 2012 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Jan 18, 2012 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 11, 2011 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Oct 31, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 19, 2011 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 1, 2011 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Sep 30, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Sep 30, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |