USPTO serial 78127838
INCOMPASS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAPPENFIELD, ANN
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 INCOMPASS?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
C. Zuniga
INCOMPASS SOLUTIONS, INC40 E 52ND ST FL 15NEW YORK, NY 10022-5911UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Business consultation services in the field of racetracks; computerized database management for racetracks; preparing business reports for racetracks | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Development of technology solutions for others in the nature of computer software development; technical support services for others in the field of racetracks in the nature of troubleshooting of computer hardware and software problems, and providing back-up computer programs and facilities; development of parameter drive software applications for others | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 10, 2006 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Sep 29, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Jul 6, 2006 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 5, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 18, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 18, 2006 | 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 16, 2005 | 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 24, 2005 | 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 4, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 2, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 2, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 19, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 14, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 23, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 15, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 3, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 3, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 24, 2004 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| May 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 26, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 12, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 11, 2004 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Jan 20, 2004 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 29, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 7, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2002 | 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. |
| Oct 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 23, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 4, 2002 | 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. |
| Sep 3, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |