USPTO serial 77194340
CAE TRUE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CALLAGHAN, BRIAN P
- 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 CAE TRUE?
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
St. Laurent, Quebec, CA
St. Laurent, Quebec, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Cynthia C. Weber
CYNTHIA C. WEBER SUGHRUE MION, PLLC2100 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW STE 800WASHINGTON, DC 20037-3200UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Flight simulator hardware and computer software that enhance the fidelity of flight simulator products, namely electric motion system comprised of electro-mechanical actuators, drive electronics, processors, sensors, interlocks, vibration isolators, and motion cueing software which control the movement of the actuators in order to reproduce the same acceleration cues that the pilot would feel in the real aircraft; automated air traffic control environment simulation computer software program using speech recognition and text-to-speech technology | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | Database management services that enhance the fidelity of flight simulator products, namely timely airport database updates reflecting changes to the real airport physical environment | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 17, 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. |
| Oct 17, 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. |
| Mar 16, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2011 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 14, 2011 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 14, 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. |
| Sep 14, 2010 | NOAM | NOA E-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. |
| Jul 20, 2010 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 20, 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. |
| Jun 17, 2010 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 14, 2010 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 11, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 10, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 10, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 11, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 11, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 11, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 11, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 5, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 5, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 5, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 9, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 2, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 31, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 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. |
| Sep 13, 2007 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Sep 13, 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. |
| Sep 13, 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 10, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 7, 2007 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Sep 7, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 6, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |