USPTO serial 76654457
VERITAGE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DWYER, JOHN D
- 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 VERITAGE?
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
Huntsville, AL
Huntsville, AL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kay Lyn Schwartz
KAY LYN SCHWARTZ IP SECTIONGARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP1601 ELM ST STE 3000DALLAS, TX 75201Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Information technology consultation; computer software consultation; providing temporary use of online non-downloadable computer software for use by companies in evaluating and managing internal support functions and outsourced services, namely, in the areas of financial management, financial accounting, issue management, contract management, performance management, compliance management, information technology, procurement, administrative tasks, human resources, and relationship management | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| May 26, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 10, 2009 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 5, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 23, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 23, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 23, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 16, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Oct 16, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 16, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 4, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Apr 3, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 1, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 28, 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. |
| Jul 28, 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. |
| Jul 24, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |