Drawing for SMARTMACHINE TECHNOLOGIES

USPTO serial 75725582

SMARTMACHINE TECHNOLOGIES

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
GILBERT, REBECCA L
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 SMARTMACHINE TECHNOLOGIES?

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.

DONALD T. OTTO

DONALD T OTTO RENNER, OTTO, BOISELLE & SKLAR1621 EUCLID AVENINETEENTH FLCLEVELAND, OH 44115-2191

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE FOR PREDICTING AND COMMUNICATING MAINTENANCE NEEDS FOR INDUSTRIAL MACHINERYACTIVE—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Oct 31, 2001DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Sep 12, 2001ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Sep 12, 2001EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Sep 12, 2001EXAREXPARTE APPEAL AFFIRMED/REVERSED IN PART—
Apr 23, 2001CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
Feb 21, 2001EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Jul 6, 2000CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon.
Jun 1, 2000CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Dec 1, 1999CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Nov 12, 1999DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Nov 8, 1999DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Nov 4, 1999DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance