USPTO serial 76677245
SIMPLIFY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRUM MILONE, MARCIE R
- 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 SIMPLIFY?
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
Richardson, TX
Richardson, TX
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kay Lyn Schwartz
KAY LYN SCHWARTZ GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP1601 ELM STREET3000 THANKSGIVING TOWERDALLAS, TX 75201-4761Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computerized electronic multi-component systems consisting of computer hardware composed of circuit boards, control panels, and electronic controllers and computer software integrated together for accessing and controlling slide projectors, video projectors, compact disc players, projection screens, lighting systems and other related audio/video equipment, sold exclusively through owner's specialty representative dealers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 14, 2011 | 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. |
| Feb 14, 2011 | 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. |
| Aug 12, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Aug 11, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 11, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 2, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 2, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 12, 2010 | 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. |
| Oct 20, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 30, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 16, 2009 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 14, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 14, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 13, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 12, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 10, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 3, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jun 2, 2008 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 10, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 10, 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. |
| Sep 8, 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. |
| Sep 1, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 5, 2007 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |