USPTO serial 76652049
RCD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SWIFT, GILBERT M
- 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 RCD?
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
New Rochelle, NY
New Rochelle, NY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Karl F. Milde, Jr.
KARL F MILDE JR MILDE & HOFFBERG LLP10 BANK ST STE 460WHITE PLAINS, NY 10606-1946UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | ELECTRONIC HARDWARE CONSISTING OF COMMUNICATIONS COMPUTERS, DIGITAL AUDIO PLAYERS, VIDEO MONITORS, AND COMPUTER HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE FOR REMOTE MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE | ACTIVE | — |
| 044 | CARDIAC MONITORING AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL TREATMENT SERVICES, NAMELY, MONITORING AND CONTROLLING ONE OR MORE EMERGENCY CARDIAC MONITORING AND DEFIBRILLATION AND/OR PACING HARDWARE/SOFTWARE UNITS DISPOSED AT ONE OR MORE SITES WHICH OBTAIN PATIENT ELECTROCARDIOGRAMS (ECG'S) AND APPLY DEFIBRILLATION AND/OR PACING PULSES TO A PATIENT UNDER CONTROL OF A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL AT A REMOTE SITE | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 12, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2010 | 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 28, 2009 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 10, 2009 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Dec 10, 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. |
| Jun 2, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| May 29, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| May 29, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 7, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 7, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 12, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 12, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 17, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 10, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 14, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 10, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 10, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 12, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 20, 2007 | 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 28, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 31, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 30, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 19, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 20, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 22, 2006 | 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 21, 2006 | 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 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |