USPTO serial 77154084
THINK CONVENIENCE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TWOHIG, SHANNON MARIE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 121
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 THINK CONVENIENCE?
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.
Rebecca Howard
Rebecca Howard SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, INC.410 S SWING RDGREENSBORO, NC 27409-2012UNITED STATESGoods and services
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.
- Other trademarks owned by Syngenta Participations AG
- Other trademarks owned by Syngenta Participations AG
- Other trademarks in Class 001
- Other trademarks in Class 005
- Similar marks named THINK CONVENIENCE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 2, 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. |
| Nov 2, 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. |
| Apr 1, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 1, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 1, 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. |
| Sep 29, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 29, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 29, 2008 | 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 1, 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. |
| Jan 8, 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. |
| Dec 19, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 5, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 5, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 4, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 24, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| Jun 5, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |