USPTO serial 75842876
NEXTENGINE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHICOSKI, JENNIFER D
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 NEXTENGINE?
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
Santa Monica, CA
Santa Monica, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
THOMAS M COESTER
THOMAS M COESTER BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP12400 WILSHIRE BLVD SEVENTH FLLOS ANGELES, CA 90025-1030UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 040 | DIGITAL IMAGING SERVICES TO FACILITATE ELECTRONIC COMMERCE, ELECTRONIC IMAGING, SCANNING, DIGITIZING AND AUTHENTICATION OF IMAGES IN ELECTRONIC COMMERCE; HIGH RESOLUTION IMAGING FOR QUALITY CONTROL | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | ONLINE SERVICES FOR FACILITATING TRANSACTIONS, NAMELY, PROVIDING TEMPORARY USE OF ONLINE, NONDOWNLOADABLE SOFTWARE TO ALLOW USERS TO VIEW AND MANIPULATE IMAGES OF OBJECTS VIA A GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORK; COMPUTER CONSULTATION SERVICES IN THE NATURE OF OFFERING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION, INTEGRATION, CONDUCT AND MAINTENANCE OF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ACTIVITIES AND NETWORKS FOR BUSINESS; COMPUTER SITE DESIGN, DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF NETWORK WEB PAGES FOR OTHERS; COMPUTER SOFTWARE DESIGN FOR OTHERS IN ALL FIELDS RELATED TO ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ACTIVITIES FOR BUSINESS; DISPLAYING WEBSITES AND IMAGES OF OTHERS ON A COMPUTER SERVER | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 27, 2005 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Sep 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 3, 2004 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 15, 2004 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Nov 15, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 4, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 24, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 21, 2004 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| May 21, 2004 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 19, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 24, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 21, 2003 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2003 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| May 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 21, 2003 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 28, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 25, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 20, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 21, 2002 | 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. |
| Feb 26, 2002 | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 23, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 13, 2001 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2001 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A 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. |
| Sep 22, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 27, 2000 | 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. |
| Mar 21, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |