USPTO serial 85924419
BASTION INFRASTRUCTURE GROUP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARLSON, KRISTIN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 BASTION INFRASTRUCTURE GROUP?
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.
Jeremy M. Klass
JEREMY M. KLASS HOLLAND & HART LLPP.O. BOX 8749ATTN: TRADEMARK DOCKETINGDENVER, CO 80201Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | financial services, namely, investment management services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2019 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE E-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. |
| May 16, 2019 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 25, 2018 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 1, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 28, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 28, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 27, 2018 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 2018 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2018 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 26, 2018 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 22, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 22, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 27, 2017 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 26, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 14, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 14, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 5, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 5, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 5, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 28, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 28, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 27, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 6, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 31, 2016 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 31, 2016 | ECDR | TEAS CHANGE OF DOMESTIC REPRESENTATIVES ADDRESS | — |
| Dec 4, 2015 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 2, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 2, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 17, 2015 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 27, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 23, 2015 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 16, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 16, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 9, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 4, 2014 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 29, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 24, 2014 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 3, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 3, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2014 | 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. |
| Aug 30, 2013 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION 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 30, 2013 | 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 23, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 12, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 12, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 29, 2013 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| May 13, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| May 9, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |