USPTO serial 77104946
REFPI
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WHITE, RICHARD F
- 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 REFPI?
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
Westlake Village, CA
Westlake Village, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Bradley P. Hartman
Bradley P. Hartman Hartman Law PLC7114 E. Stetson DriveSuite 205Scottsdale, AZ 85251-3250Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Advertising and marketing services, namely, promoting the goods and services of others in the field of real estate and financial planning; advertising and marketing services, namely, assisting real estate professionals in the advertisement and promotion of real estate as part of a financial plan and investment strategy; advertising and marketing services, namely, promoting the goods and services of others by advocating marketing methods and systems that relate to or are based on the integration of real estate and real estate strategies with financial planning; advertising and marketing services, namely, assisting others in the marketing and promotion of real estate services by integrating marketing methods and systems that relate to or are based on the integration of real estate and real estate strategies with financial planning | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Apr 16, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 11, 2010 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 4, 2010 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 26, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | 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. |
| Apr 7, 2009 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 23, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 23, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 11, 2009 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 10, 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. |
| Feb 10, 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. |
| Jan 15, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 15, 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. |
| Apr 22, 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. |
| Apr 2, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 18, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 18, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 28, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 27, 2008 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 8, 2008 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2008 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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 8, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 28, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 27, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 27, 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 30, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 30, 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. |
| May 23, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |