USPTO serial 86302237
PERFORMANCEDRIVER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRUM MILONE, MARCIE R
- 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 PERFORMANCEDRIVER?
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
Markham, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lawrence E. Abelman
LAWRENCE E. ABELMAN ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 3RD AVE10th FloorNEW YORK, NY 10017-4011Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Downloadable web-based application software and database management software for use in the fields of customer relationship management, business and sales processes, marketing and data integration; Downloadable web-based application software and database management software for automotive dealerships and aftermarkets for use in management of local and enterprise functionality, visibility and reporting; Downloadable web-based application software and database management software for automotive OEMs for use in the fields of enterprise management, data consolidation and functional integration | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Software as a Service (SAAS) services, namely, hosting software over the internet, intranet, local servers or private networks for use in the field of customer relationship management, and sales leads tracking management; Software as a service (SAAS) services featuring web-based application software and database management software for use in the fields of customer relationship management, business and sales processes, and marketing and data integration, which solutions integrate seamlessly with dealer management systems and external databases, supporting and facilitating automotive dealerships and aftermarkets, local and enterprise functionality, visibility and reporting; providing on-line non-downloadable web-based application software and database management software for use in the fields of customer relationship management, business and sales processes, marketing and data integration; providing on-line non-downloadable web-based application software and database management software for automotive dealerships and aftermarkets for use in management of local and enterprise functionality, visibility and reporting; providing on-line non-downloadable web-based application software and database management software for automotive OEMs for use in the fields of enterprise management, data consolidation and functional integration | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 2018 | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2018 | 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. |
| Jul 11, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 10, 2017 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 5, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 5, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 5, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 15, 2016 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 6, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 17, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 17, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 17, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 16, 2016 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 7, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 7, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 7, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 7, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 30, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 30, 2015 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 17, 2015 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 16, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 26, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 26, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 20, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Nov 19, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 23, 2014 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2014 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2014 | 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. |
| Sep 18, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 19, 2014 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 18, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jun 10, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |