USPTO serial 77567548
MOBILIZ
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LE, KHANH M
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 MOBILIZ?
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
Coral Gables, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Howard M. Gitten
HOWARD M GITTEN EDWARDS ANGELL PALMER & DODGE LLPFDR STATION PO BOX 130NEW YORK, NY 10150-0130UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Electronic transmission of financial data for electronic transactions; Providing electronic transmission of credit card transaction data and electronic payment data via a global computer network | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | On-line security services, namely, providing security and anonymity for electronically transmitted credit/debit card or prepaid card transactions through mobile devices; Providing an on-line non-downloadable software platform which enables users to electronically pay for multiple services via an electronic device, event-triggered alerts, transmit location information, deliver push marketing advertising, monitor and manage stock inventory levels and stock usage, promote products and services for others via digital marketing, manage loyalty programs, discounts, coupons and surveys; Computer advisory services in the field of management of mobile payments, namely, research, design, development, modification, and maintenance of computer software systems used for mobile payments; Computer advisory services in the field of management of mobile payments, namely, technical support in the nature of troubleshooting of computer software problems and monitoring of network systems; Application service provider, namely, providing, hosting, managing, developing, and maintaining applications, software, websites, and databases of others in the fields of wireless communication, mobile information access, and remote data management | ACTIVE | — |
| 045 | Providing user authentication services in e-commerce transactions for electronically transmitted credit and debit card and prepaid card transactions through mobile devices; Providing user authentication of electronic funds transfer, credit and debit card and electronic check transactions via a global computer network | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 1, 2012 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 1, 2012 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Nov 1, 2012 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 17, 2012 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jul 2, 2012 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jul 2, 2012 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 22, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 22, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 11, 2012 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 11, 2012 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 11, 2012 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 11, 2012 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Dec 12, 2011 | 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. |
| Dec 9, 2011 | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 18, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 18, 2011 | 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. |
| May 23, 2011 | 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. |
| May 20, 2011 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 29, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 9, 2010 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 9, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 17, 2009 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 16, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Sep 15, 2009 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 15, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 14, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 20, 2009 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 24, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 24, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 24, 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. |
| Jan 2, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 24, 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. |
| Dec 24, 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. |
| Dec 15, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |