USPTO serial 78162937
.NOW
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OH, WON TEAK
- 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 .NOW?
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.
Evan M. Kent
LORI M STOCKTON BLAKELY SOKOLOFF TAYLOR & ZAFMAN12400 WILSHIRE BLVD 7TH FLLOS ANGELES, CA 90025-1030UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR DELIVERING, EXECUTING, MONITORING AND MANAGING DATA, CONTENT AND COMPUTER PROGRAMS ACROSS COMPUTER NETWORKS, THE INTERNET, AND WIRELESS COMPUTING PLATFORMS, DEVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | CONSULTATION SERVICES CONCERNING COMPUTER SOFTWARE, THE DELIVERY, EXECUTION, MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT OF DATA CONTENT AND COMPUTER PROGRAMS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 2005 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 16, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 21, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2003 | 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. |
| Mar 11, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |