Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for VIZENDO, serial 77172741, as a dated PDF. One price, one document, delivered in about a minute.
INSTANT DELIVERY
Trademark Status Report
$7.99
The USPTO's own status record for this mark, on one dated page.
- Current status with a plain-English verdict
- Owner, classes, filing basis, and every key date
- The mark as it appears on the federal record
- Every prosecution event, filing to today
- Source-cited with the exact retrieval date
Built from the USPTO's TSDR record. Assignment chain of title and TTAB proceeding files sit in separate USPTO systems and are not included.
Preview
◆ TRADEMARKCHECKER.AITRADEMARK STATUS REPORT
VIZENDOSerial 77172741 · Principal Register
Dead · Cancelled
Owner: Glaxo Group Limited
Class 005 - Pharmaceuticals
Filed May 04, 2007
Registered Jun 24, 2008
The record shows that “VIZENDO” is a cancelled Principal Register trademark owned by Glaxo Group Limited; the registration was cancelled on Jan 30 2015 because the owner failed to file an acceptable Section 8 declaration, and the record contains no later activity. The registration covered Class 005 pharmaceuticals, specifically “pharmaceutical preparations and substances for the treatment of infectious diseases, blood disorders, pain, inflammation, sepsis, alopecia and obesity, and for the treatment of viral, metabolic, endocrine, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, cardiopulmonary, genitourinary, sexual dysfunction, oncological, hepatological, ophthalmological, respiratory, neurological, gastrointestinal, hormonal, dermatological and psychiatric related diseases and disorders, and for the treatment of damaged skin and tissue; and for vaccines.” A similar name used for drugs or medical treatments would raise the closest record‑based concern, while uses outside that therapeutic scope are farther from the listed area. The record does not give Glaxo control over every possible use of the word “Vizendo.” No oppositions, cancellations beyond the Section 8 event, or court actions appear, so the supplied history shows no visible enforcement activity. I'd treat this as a meaningful concern if you plan a pharma‑related brand, but the risk is lower for unrelated goods or services.
Full event history, owner details, and verdict inside.
The way I'd use it, honestly, is as the thing you attach when a bank, a marketplace, or a co-founder asks "are we clear on the name". It answers in one page.