USPTO serial 76045475
ORBITEL ESP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MATTESSICH, DANIELLE
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE UNIT
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 ORBITEL ESP?
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.
Kathryn A. Donohue
BARBARA L DELANEY PEPPER HAMILTON LLP3000 TWO LOGAN SQ18TH & ARCH STSPHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-2799Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | telecommunications gateway services; providing telecommunications connections to a global computer network; telecommunications services, namely, ISDN services; telecommunications services, namely personal communication services; long distance services, calling card and prepaid phone card services; providing facilities and equipment for international video conferencing; audio and video international teleconferencing 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 8, 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. |
| Jun 8, 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. |
| Sep 16, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 1, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Sep 1, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 1, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 17, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 5, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 5, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2003 | 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. |
| Jul 1, 2003 | 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. |
| Jun 11, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 1, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 23, 2003 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 24, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 24, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 4, 2001 | 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 3, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 2, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 16, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |