USPTO serial 78022220
SIMPLESERVE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EVANKO, PATRICIA MALESARDI
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - SENIOR ATTORNEY
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with SIMPLESERVE?
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
Los Altos Hills, CT
Los Altos Hills, CT
Burlingame, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
LORI M. STOCKTON
MARK R GALIS GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP77 W WACKER DR STE 2500CHICAGO, IL 60601-1732UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Personal computer application software for automatically connecting to the Internet, caching content, and serving the content to specific information appliances | 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 7, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 7, 2005 | 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 7, 2005 | 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 27, 2005 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 2005 | CNCF | SU - ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 9, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 2, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 20, 2004 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2004 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 15, 2004 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 7, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 1, 2003 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 2, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 27, 2003 | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 24, 2003 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 24, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 17, 2003 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Nov 5, 2002 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Oct 17, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 2002 | 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. |
| Aug 19, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 19, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 5, 2001 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2001 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2001 | 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. |
| May 29, 2001 | 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. |
| May 16, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 16, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 12, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 6, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |