USPTO serial 75579675
IMMUNE SYSTEM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- JOHNSON, AISHA CLARKE
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with IMMUNE SYSTEM?
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.
BETH M GOLDMAN
BETH M GOLDMAN HELLER EHRMAN WHITE & MCAULIFFE333 BUSH STSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94101-2878UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Computer programming; computer software installation; research services relating to computer hardware and computer software; technical consultation in the field of computer software installation and maintenance; computer support services, namely, technical support and software update services, computer security services, and computer consulting services relating to computer products and services | 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 11, 2004 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jun 29, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 15, 2004 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 19, 2003 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Dec 19, 2003 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 24, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 24, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 24, 2003 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Dec 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 18, 2002 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 18, 2002 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 27, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 25, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2002 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 17, 2001 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2001 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Apr 3, 2001 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Mar 21, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 6, 2000 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 29, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 18, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 13, 2000 | 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 21, 1999 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| May 21, 1999 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| May 11, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 28, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 28, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |