USPTO serial 77522820
KNOW MORE_
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STOIDES, KATHERINE
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 KNOW MORE_?
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.
Jennifer M. Mikulina
Jennifer M. Mikulina McDermott Will & Emery LLP227 W. Monroe StreetSuite 4400Chicago, IL 60606-5096Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Computer services in the nature of customized web pages featuring user-defined information, personal profiles and information; providing on-line non-downloadable software for use in managing and maintaining information and files over computer networks, intranets and the Internet; providing on-line non-downloadable software for creating and maintaining websites and blogs; providing on-line non-downloadable software for file collaboration and revision tracking; providing on-line non-downloadable software for granting and controlling access to files; providing on-line non-downloadable software for managing individual and group calendars and schedules; providing on-line non-downloadable software featuring online storage of documents and databases; providing on-line computer mapping services; providing on-line non-downloadable software for tracking, managing, and optimizing advertising and promotional campaigns, and calculating return on investment in connection with the same; providing online non-downloadable software for tracking website traffic, e-commerce activity, customer loyalty, and sales conversion rates; providing online non-downloadable software for optimizing website navigation; providing online non-downloadable software for managing, collecting, monitoring and analyzing web, blog and other online site traffic, user preferences and links in real time; technical support services, namely, trouble shooting of problems of software for managing, collecting, monitoring and analyzing web, blog and other online site traffic, user preferences and links, technical support and computer consulting services related to all of the foregoing; computer consultation services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 4, 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. |
| Sep 3, 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. |
| Feb 7, 2012 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 6, 2012 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 2, 2012 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2012 | 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. |
| Aug 18, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2011 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2011 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 17, 2011 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 17, 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. |
| Aug 2, 2011 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2011 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 2, 2011 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 3, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 2, 2011 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 31, 2011 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 31, 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. |
| Aug 14, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2010 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 13, 2010 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 13, 2010 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 13, 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. |
| Feb 2, 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. |
| Nov 10, 2009 | 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. |
| Nov 10, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 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. |
| Oct 21, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 5, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 26, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 22, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 22, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 21, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 27, 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. |
| May 26, 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. |
| Mar 30, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 30, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 30, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 27, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 25, 2008 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION 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. |
| Sep 24, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 18, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |