USPTO serial 76015587
SYNCHRONICITY NETWORK EFFECT PROGRAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- IN, SUNG HYUN
- 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 SYNCHRONICITY NETWORK EFFECT PROGRAM?
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.
Michael J. Bevilacqua
MICHAEL J BEVILACQUA WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LL60 STATE STBOSTON, MA 02109UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Business services, namely, creating and maintaining partnerships among technology companies for managing product development, electronic design, and customer data; business consultation services; distributorship services featuring computer software | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Computer services, namely, designing computer software for others for use in managing product development, electronic design, and customer data via the Internet | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Synchronicity Software, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Synchronicity Software, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named SYNCHRONICITY NETWORK EFFECT PROGRAM
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 2007 | 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. |
| May 2, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 24, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 30, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 10, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 12, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 9, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 6, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 30, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 31, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Aug 31, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 22, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 18, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 30, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 10, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 25, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 8, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 6, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 8, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 10, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 4, 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 22, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 15, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |