USPTO serial 77420861
CARDIOTEL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHOE, KELLY
- 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 CARDIOTEL?
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.
Stephen J. Quigley
Stephen J. Quigley Ostrolenk Faber LLP7th Floor1180 Avenue of the AmericasNEW YORK, NY 10036Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Providing an interactive website that enables insurance companies, doctors and patients to enter, track, monitor and generate health and medical information and reports of personal body-related data, namely, diastolic/systolic blood pressure, pulse, pulse-frequency, and cardiac data | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 23, 2012 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2012 | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2011 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 16, 2011 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Sep 16, 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. |
| May 19, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2011 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| May 17, 2011 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| May 17, 2011 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 17, 2011 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 2011 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Apr 8, 2011 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 29, 2011 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Mar 23, 2011 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2011 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 23, 2011 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 22, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 20, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 20, 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. |
| Mar 23, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 29, 2009 | 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 9, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 25, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 23, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 20, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 5, 2009 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 2, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2009 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 2, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 2, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 1, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 1, 2009 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 1, 2009 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Sep 8, 2009 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Feb 3, 2009 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Feb 3, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 7, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 7, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Jun 30, 2008 | 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 27, 2008 | 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 20, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 20, 2008 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |