USPTO serial 76697751
A OK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FATHY, DOMINIC
- 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 A OK?
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
San Francisco, CA
San Francisco, CA
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 Street, Suite 3000IP SECTIONDallas, TX 75201-4761Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 045 | Certification or transparent/external conveyance of privacy standards, namely, electronically monitoring, detecting and reporting on suspicious and abnormal patterns of Internet activity which typically indicate problems such as theft, wrongdoing, training issues, or customer service issues | 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 13, 2012 | 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 13, 2012 | 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. |
| Jun 18, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2011 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 16, 2011 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 11, 2011 | 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. |
| Nov 16, 2010 | 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 27, 2010 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 12, 2010 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 6, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 4, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 31, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 30, 2010 | 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 23, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 15, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 10, 2009 | 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 9, 2009 | 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 3, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 16, 2009 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |