USPTO serial 75981985
ADVANCED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC.
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STEPHENS, SONYA B
- 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 ADVANCED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC.?
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.
Penny R. Slicer
PENNY R SLICER STINSON MORRISON HECKER LLP1201 WALNUT STE 2800KANSAS CITY, MO 64106-2150UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER SOFTWARE RECORDED ON CD-ROMS AND DISKETTES FOR USE TO PROVIDE QUESTIONS AND SCENARIOS REQUIRING STUDENT INPUT, TO PROVIDE CORRECTIVE ADVICE AND INSTRUCTION, TO PROVIDE A DATABASE OF STUDENT INPUT AND PROGRESS IN THE TRAINING, AND TO PROVIDE THE STUDENT INPUT AND PROGRESS IN THE TRAINING, AND TO PROVIDE THE STUDENTS FINAL GRADE, ALL IN THE FIELDS OF PUBLIC SAFETY, MILITARY EQUIPMENT AND WEAPONS SYSTEMS; AND INSTRUCTIONAL MANUALS SOLD THEREWITH AS A UNIT | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | BUSINESS MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION, NAMELY, PROGRAM AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT OF GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS; MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION IN THE FIELD OF HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING, NAMELY, MANAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION CONCERNING MILITARY, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND GOVERNMENTAL COMPUTER SIMULATION, ANALYSIS AND MODELING PROJECTS; BUSINESS PLANNING, NAMELY, STRATEGIC BUSINESS PLANNING FOR GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES AND AGENCIES | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | COMPUTER SYSTEMS ANALYSIS; COMPUTER CONSULTATION SERVICES; COMPUTER DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES; COMPUTER ENGINEERING, NAMELY, HARDWARE, SOFTWARE AND COMPUTER SYSTEMS ENGINEERING; TECHNICAL CONSULTATION AND RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF MILITARY STRATEGICS, NAMELY, RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS OF WAR STRATEGIES AND PROCEDURES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 19, 2003 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 16, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 11, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 11, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 26, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 5, 2003 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Feb 24, 2003 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 21, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 3, 2003 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jan 3, 2003 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| May 3, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 7, 2002 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 24, 2001 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 24, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Mar 19, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 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. |
| Sep 13, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |