USPTO serial 77769797
PROVISTA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- POWERS, ALEXANDER L
- 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 PROVISTA?
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
San Leandro, CA
San Leandro, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael L. Louie
MICHAEL L. LOUIE BEYER LAW GROUP LLPPO BOX 1687CUPERTINO, CA 95015-1687UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Educational services, namely, conducting online credentialing courses and testing in the field of eyecare and distribution of printed materials in connection therewith in hard copy or electronic format on the same topics; medical eyecare training and teaching; providing continuing medical eyecare education courses; consulting services in the field of medical eyecare education, namely, comprehensive postgraduate medical placement services for international medical graduates | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | hosting a database featuring pictures by others for clinical case presentation use in the field of eyecare | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 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. |
| Aug 29, 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. |
| Jan 25, 2011 | 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. |
| Nov 30, 2010 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Oct 25, 2010 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 25, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 11, 2010 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 8, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 7, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 7, 2010 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2010 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2010 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 23, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 23, 2010 | 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 25, 2009 | 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 25, 2009 | 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 25, 2009 | 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 24, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jul 1, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |