USPTO serial 78047001
XCELLERATION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CAPSHAW, DANIEL
- 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 XCELLERATION?
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
Manassas, VA
Manassas, VA
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
ARMONK, NY
Other trademarks owned by INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Leonora Hoicka
Leonora Hoicka IBM CorporationNorth Castle DriveINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND LICENSING DEPTARMONK, NY 10504Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Computer consultation services in the field of enterprise data storage and the design and implementation of data storage environments | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Novus Consulting Group, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Novus Consulting Group, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named XCELLERATION
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2008 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Apr 9, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Mar 10, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 1, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 19, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 31, 2007 | FIXD | ELECTRONIC RECORD REVIEW COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | ERRR | ON HOLD - ELECTRONIC RECORD REVIEW REQUIRED | — |
| May 30, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 30, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 11, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 19, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Nov 14, 2005 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Nov 14, 2005 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 5, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 27, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 27, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Mar 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 9, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 26, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 14, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 14, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 16, 2004 | DMCC | DATA MODIFICATION COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 14, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 12, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 10, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 25, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 9, 2002 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 17, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 28, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 21, 2002 | 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. |
| Jun 19, 2001 | 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. |
| Jun 10, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |