COGENT
Cogent Investment Operations Limited
| Research |
OneLook
Acronym Finder
|
| Serial Number | 75719063 |
| Mark Drawing Code | 1000: Typeset: Word(s)/letter(s)/number(s) |
| Domestic Representative | HOFFMAN, WASSON & GITLER, P.C. |
| Attorney Name | Martin P. Hoffman |
| Attorney Docket Number | T-6683.dwg/e |
| Law Office Assigned | M60 |
| Employee Name | HICKEY, TONI Y |
Timeline
| 1999-06-02 | Application Filed |
| 2002-09-26 | Abandon |
| 2002-09-26 | Status: Dead/Abandoned |
| 2004-01-28 | Location: FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA) |
| 2018-07-08 | Transaction Date |
Trademark Applicants & Owners
| Owner: |  COGENT INVESTMENT OPERATIONS LIMITED |
| Address | 55 Moorgate London EC2R 6PA GB GB2 |
| Legal Entity Type | Company |
| Legal Entity State | GB2 |
Documents
Click the blue "Refresh" button to load certificates, specimines, application, and other documents.
Attorney of Record
Good, Services, and Codes
| International Codes: | 36 |
| U.S. Codes: | 100,101,102 |
| Type Code | Type |
|---|---|
| GS0361 | Administration and brokerage of retail financial commercial products, namely, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, consumer loans and student loans |
Trademark Filing History
| Description | Date | Event Coding |
|---|---|---|
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 1999-09-09 | 1 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | 1999-09-15 | 2 CNRT F:First Action |
| CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | 2000-03-15 | 3 CRFA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | 2000-06-22 | 4 CNRT F:First Action |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2000-06-24 | 5 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | 2000-12-20 | 6 CRFA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | 2001-04-18 | 7 CNSL F:First Action |
| INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | 2001-10-22 | 8 CNSI S: |
| CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | 2001-11-26 | 9 CRFA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2002-01-30 | 10 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | 2002-03-25 | 11 CNFR O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | 2002-05-16 | 12 CRFA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | 2002-05-17 | 13 CRFA I:Incoming Correspondence |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2002-09-06 | 14 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2002-09-06 | 15 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | 2002-10-07 | 16 RECD O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2002-10-08 | 17 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | 2002-10-08 | 18 EXAF T:TTAB Proceeding |
| EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | 2002-10-10 | 19 EXPI T:TTAB Proceeding |
| ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | 2002-12-03 | 20 DOCK D:Assigned to Examiner |
| EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | 2003-01-31 | 21 CNES O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | 2003-08-26 | 22 EXPA T:TTAB Proceeding |
| EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | 2003-11-24 | 23 EXPT T:TTAB Proceeding |
| EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | 2003-11-24 | 24 EXPT T:TTAB Proceeding |
| CASE FILE IN TICRS | 2004-01-15 | 25 CFIT O:Outgoing Correspondence |
| ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | 2002-09-26 | 26 ABN3 O:Outgoing Correspondence |
Similar Marks
uspto.report is an independent third-party trademark research tool that is not affiliated, endorsed, or sponsored by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or any other governmental organization. The information provided by uspto.report is based on publicly available data at the time of writing and is intended for informational purposes only.
While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information displayed on this site. The use of this site is at your own risk. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.
All official trademark data, including owner information, should be verified by visiting the official USPTO website at www.uspto.gov. This site is not intended to replace professional legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for consulting with a legal professional who is knowledgeable about trademark law.
| 