USPTO serial 76384004
SUMMIT SOLUTIONS, INC. BUSINESS SOLUTIONS THROUGH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FROMM, MARTHA L
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 SUMMIT SOLUTIONS, INC. BUSINESS SOLUTIONS THROUGH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY?
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.
JOSEPH C OEHLERS
B JOSEPH SCHAEFF DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP1 S MAIN ST STE 1300ONE DAYTON CTRDAYTON, OH 45402-2023Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | business development support services through information technology, namely analysis of software design, development and maintenance requirements | ACTIVE | Apr 20, 2000 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2006 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| May 8, 2006 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 8, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Apr 12, 2005 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 15, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 15, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 14, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2004 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 3, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 26, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 14, 2004 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Nov 24, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 3, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 3, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 1, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 31, 2003 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Feb 26, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 26, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 22, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 23, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |