USPTO serial 77183800
CLEFIA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCMORROW, JANICE LEE
- 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 CLEFIA?
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.
Robert B.G. Horowitz, Esq.
Robert B.G. Horowitz, Esq. Baker & Hostetler LLP45 Rockefeller PlazaNew York, NY 10111UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Contact-less IC cards, namely, contact-less encoded electronic chip cards for users of smart cards, computers and mobile telephones; personal computers, video game machines for use with televisions, digital televisions, digital video hard disc drive recorder, cellular telephones, memory cards, optical compact disc players, optical compact disk recorders; optical video disk players; optical video disk recorders; wireless local area network access points for connecting network computer users; software for networks to communicate with the Internet, software for digital rights management, software for protection of data in a computer system that prohibits unauthorized access to data and documents, to be used in the field of cipher and analysis checking | 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. |
| Oct 14, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 3, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 2, 2010 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 29, 2010 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 29, 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. |
| Apr 16, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 15, 2010 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 13, 2010 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 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. |
| Feb 15, 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. |
| Jan 15, 2010 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jun 1, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 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. |
| Nov 30, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 30, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Sep 4, 2008 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Sep 4, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| 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 20, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 19, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 14, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 14, 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. |
| Aug 20, 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. |
| Aug 18, 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. |
| Aug 11, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 22, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |