USPTO serial 78221598
SMARTCITY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GUSTASON, ANNE C
- 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 SMARTCITY?
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.
Lawrence E. Abelman
Lawrence E. Abelman Abelman Frayne & Schwab666 Third Avenue10th FloorNew York, NY 10017Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Computer systems analysis, recovery of computer data, technical computer project management services, engineering, installation of computer software, mechanical research and product research and development for others, consultancy in the field of computer hardware, quality control, maintenance of computer software, data conversion of computer programs and data (not physical conversion), computer system design, computer rental of computer software, hosting computer web sites, computer software design, creating and maintaining web sites for others, computer programming, all of the above services not provided at, to, or in connection with convention centers | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2010 | 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 27, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 27, 2009 | 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. |
| Nov 4, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 15, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 29, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 23, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 2, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 2, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 2, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 2, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 12, 2008 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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 20, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 20, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 17, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 6, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 15, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 18, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 17, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 7, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 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. |
| Aug 25, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |