USPTO serial 76674538
DDR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DALIER, JOHN DAVID
- 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 DDR?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kathleen Cooney-Porter
KATHLEEN COONEY-PORTER OBLON, SPIVAK, McCLELLAND, MAIER1940 DUKE STALEXANDRIA, VA 22314-3451UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software and computer hardware for use in monitoring and improving driver performance, the foregoing not including computer memory integrated circuits or semiconductor chips | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 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. |
| Mar 22, 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. |
| Sep 9, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 9, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 24, 2009 | CORV | REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 24, 2009 | CHPB | POST PUBLICATION AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Mar 12, 2009 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 17, 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. |
| Jan 7, 2009 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | EPPA | TEAS POST PUBLICATION AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 18, 2008 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 21, 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. |
| Oct 1, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 15, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 13, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 14, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 12, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 12, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 7, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 2, 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. |
| Jul 2, 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. |
| Jul 2, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 3, 2007 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |