Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for DATARUNNER, serial 85890116, 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
DATARUNNERSerial 85890116 · Principal Register
Dead · Cancelled
Owner: Panasas, Inc.
Class 009 - Electrical & Scientific Apparatus
Filed Mar 29, 2013
Registered Jan 14, 2014
The record shows that the DATARUNNER trademark is cancelled, with the last status change on August 21 2020 when the registration was cancelled for failure to file a required Section 8 declaration, and the owner listed is Panasas, Inc., a Delaware corporation. The registration covered only one class—Class 009, Electrical & Scientific Apparatus—specifically “computer hardware and software, namely, storage systems capable of network communication, namely, microprocessors, computer memories and network access server operating software; computer software for use in managing and controlling the replication and movement of information between data storage systems.” A similar name used for products or services in that same technical area would raise the closest record‑based concern, while uses outside those described are farther from the scope shown. The record does not give Panasas control over every possible use of the word “Datarunner.” No Supplemental Register filing appears, and the prosecution history simply tracks the normal filing, allowance, registration and later cancellation steps. The supplied history contains no oppositions, cancellations by third parties, or other enforcement actions. I'd treat this as a meaningful concern if you plan to market comparable data‑storage hardware or software under a similar name.
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.