USPTO serial 77914193
SQUARE UP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARROLL, DORITT
- 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 SQUARE UP?
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 Francisco, CA
San Francisco, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Connie L. Ellerbach, Esq.
Connie L. Ellerbach, Esq. Fenwick & West LLP801 California StreetSilicon Valley CenterMountain View, CA 94041Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | Electronic payment services, namely, reconciling financial transaction accounts for others 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 30, 2013 | 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. |
| Dec 30, 2013 | 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. |
| May 21, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| May 20, 2013 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 29, 2013 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 29, 2013 | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2012 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 13, 2012 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 9, 2012 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 9, 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. |
| Feb 1, 2012 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 31, 2012 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 31, 2012 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jan 6, 2012 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 6, 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 27, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 25, 2011 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 25, 2011 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 25, 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 24, 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. |
| Mar 29, 2011 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2011 | 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 18, 2011 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 18, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 26, 2011 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 26, 2011 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 26, 2011 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2011 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2011 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 5, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 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. |
| Jan 5, 2011 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 5, 2011 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 2010 | 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. |
| Nov 10, 2010 | 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. |
| May 10, 2010 | 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. |
| May 10, 2010 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| 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. |
| Apr 14, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 25, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jan 21, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |