USPTO serial 86009328
ZYMEPY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAM, HAI-LY HUYNH
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 ZYMEPY?
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
British Columbia, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Rochelle D. Alpert
ROCHELLE D. ALPERT MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP1 MARKET SPEAR STREET TOWERSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Software used for building molecular modeling infrastructure | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 8, 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. |
| Aug 8, 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. |
| Jan 9, 2019 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2019 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2019 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 8, 2019 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 30, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 30, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 30, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 29, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 29, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2018 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 13, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 13, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 12, 2018 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 7, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 3, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 3, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 29, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 28, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 27, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 14, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 14, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 14, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 9, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 20, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 20, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 17, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 17, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 10, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 22, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 3, 2014 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 28, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 28, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 28, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 8, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 8, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 23, 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. |
| Oct 25, 2013 | 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. |
| Oct 25, 2013 | 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. |
| Oct 25, 2013 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2013 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 20, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jul 16, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |