USPTO serial 76671230
RAPIDMAX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLANDU, FLORENTINA
- 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 RAPIDMAX?
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
Rapidmax Technologies Corporation
SINDIAN CITY, TAIPEI COUNTY, TW
Rapidmax Technologies Corporation
SINDIAN CITY, TAIPEI COUNTY, TW
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Thomas J. Moore
THOMAS J. MOORE BACON & THOMAS, PLLC625 Slaters Lane, Fourth FloorAlexandria, VA 22314-1176UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Telematics apparatus, namely, wireless internet devices in the nature of internet and telephone communications which provide telematic services and have a cellular phone function; LAN (local area network) computer cards for connecting portable computer devices to computer networks; chip card readers; computer hardware, namely, firewalls; aerials; modems; network access server hardware; computer network adapters; ethernet repeaters; computer network concentrators; signal enhancement devices, namely, amplifiers; frequency converters; radio base stations; computer network gateways; computer networking hardware; computer network routers; computer network bridges; computer network hubs; computer network interface cards | 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 8, 2008 | 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 8, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 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. |
| Mar 14, 2008 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 27, 2007 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 30, 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. |
| Oct 10, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 23, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 23, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 18, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 14, 2007 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 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. |
| May 4, 2007 | 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. |
| May 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 28, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jan 19, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |