USPTO serial 76562609
SPAM DNA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- YAO, GRETTA
- 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 SPAM DNA?
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
San Francisco, CA
San Francisco, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
David D'Zurilla
David D'Zurilla Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, P.A.P.O. Box 2938Minneapolis, MN 55402UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for detecting, filtering, monitoring, reporting, blocking, removing, and preventing unsolicited, bulk, unwanted or content-inappropriate electronic mail, data, sounds and images; content filtering software; software for use in tracking senders of unsolicited, bulk, unwanted or content-inappropriate electronic mail, data, sounds and images; a feature of computer software for use in detecting, filtering, monitoring, reporting, blocking, removing, and preventing unsolicited, bulk, unwanted or content-inappropriate electronic mail, data, sounds and images; a feature of computer software for use in filtering content | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Computer services, namely, detecting, filtering, monitoring, reporting, blocking, removing, tracking and preventing unwanted and unsolicited electronic messages sent via electronic means | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 19, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2009 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2009 | 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 18, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 18, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 18, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 4, 2008 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Feb 4, 2008 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jan 16, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| May 2, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Nov 22, 2005 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| May 11, 2005 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| May 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 20, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 25, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 14, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jan 12, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 12, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 11, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 28, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 21, 2004 | 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. |
| Jun 18, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 18, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |