USPTO serial 76622111
S3: SIMPLE, SYSTEMIC AND SCALEABLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AGOSTO, GISELLE MARIE
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105
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 S3: SIMPLE, SYSTEMIC AND SCALEABLE?
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
Harrington Park, NJ
Harrington Park, NJ
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Royal W. Craig
Royal W. Craig OBER/KALER120 E. Baltimore Street, Suite 800Baltimore, MD 21202-1643UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | BUSINESS SERVICES, NAMELY, BUSINESS CONSULTING SERVICES IN THE FIELD OF MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS AND APPROACH | 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 13, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Mar 12, 2008 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Feb 6, 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. |
| Feb 6, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 6, 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 6, 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. |
| Dec 5, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2006 | 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. |
| May 16, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 14, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 27, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 8, 2005 | 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 8, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 29, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 10, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |