USPTO serial 76230107
BRAND SENTINEL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCMORROW, JANICE LEE
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL 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 BRAND SENTINEL?
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
Vernon Hills, IL
Vernon Hills, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Liisa M Thomas
LIISA M THOMAS GARDNER, CARTON & DOUGLASSTE 3700191 N WACKER DRCHICAGO, IL 60606-1698Goods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| May 4, 2004 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 27, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 21, 2004 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Apr 21, 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. |
| Oct 24, 2003 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 16, 2003 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 25, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 26, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Aug 27, 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. |
| Aug 7, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 17, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 9, 2002 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Feb 4, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 15, 2002 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jan 8, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 29, 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 16, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |