USPTO serial 90426043
BITS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ELLINGER FATHY, JESSICA M
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110
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 BITS?
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.
Elizabeth C. Buckingham
Elizabeth C. Buckingham DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP50 SOUTH SIXTH STREETSUITE 1500MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1498Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Software as a Service (SaaS) featuring computer software that allows online managed client solicitation of information mainly in the area of stakeholder engagement, employee and task tracking, communication, data solicitation and both analytical and financial reporting | 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 22, 2025 | 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 22, 2025 | 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 7, 2025 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2025 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 7, 2025 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 12, 2025 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 2, 2024 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2024 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2024 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 2, 2024 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2024 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 1, 2024 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| May 1, 2024 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 1, 2024 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 1, 2024 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 15, 2024 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 12, 2023 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2023 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2023 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 9, 2023 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 9, 2023 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 8, 2023 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 25, 2023 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 26, 2022 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2022 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 26, 2022 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 22, 2022 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 19, 2022 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 19, 2022 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 19, 2022 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 31, 2021 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 31, 2021 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 2021 | 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 9, 2021 | 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. |
| Jul 9, 2021 | 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. |
| Jul 9, 2021 | 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. |
| Jun 27, 2021 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 23, 2021 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2021 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jan 1, 2021 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |