USPTO serial 77267029
NGINEERED TO FIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHUO, EMILY M
- 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 NGINEERED TO FIT?
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
Bannockburn, IL
Bannockburn, IL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Adam K Sacharoff
Adam K Sacharoff MUCH SHELIST DENENBERG AMENT & RUBENSTEIN, P.C.191 N WACKER DR STE 1800CHICAGO, IL 60606-1615UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Computer consultation; technical consultation in the field of computer systems; computer architecture design for others; computer network design for others, consulting in the field of local area computer network and wide area computer network analysis and implementation; software and hardware consultation in the field of wireless hardware and software products; new product development and design in the field of computer interfaces; computer systems analysis; and remote and on-site monitoring and integration of computer systems, namely, monitoring the computer systems of others for technical purposes and providing back-up computer programs and hardware, troubleshooting of computer hardware and software problems, and monitoring software design for others | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 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. |
| Jul 6, 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. |
| Nov 25, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 25, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 25, 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. |
| Jun 3, 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. |
| Mar 11, 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. |
| Feb 20, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 20, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 20, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 19, 2007 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Dec 19, 2007 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Dec 19, 2007 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Dec 6, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 5, 2007 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |