USPTO serial 78223210
WARP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GRIFFIN, JAMES
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 WARP?
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
Delray Beach, FL
Delray Beach, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Brian R. Coleman
David Bogart Dort Dort Patent Corp.Box 26219 Crystal City StationArlington, VA 22215UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for searching, compiling, indexing and organizing information within individual workstations, personal computers or computer networks; computer software for creating indexes of information, indexes of web sites and indexes of other information resources | ACTIVE | Jun 1, 1996 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 22, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jun 22, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 3, 2008 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | GNSN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | CNES | SU - EXAMINER STATEMENT - WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 24, 2007 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Jul 30, 2007 | GEA1 | NOTIFICATION OF ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 30, 2007 | CNCF | SU - ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 24, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 22, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 18, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 29, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 22, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| May 22, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 22, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 29, 2007 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | CNCF | SU - ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Nov 17, 2006 | CNFR | SU - 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. |
| Nov 17, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 17, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 4, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 30, 2005 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Jun 30, 2005 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 21, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 21, 2005 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Dec 28, 2004 | 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 5, 2004 | 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 15, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 28, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 28, 2004 | 1.AD | SEC. 1(A) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| Jul 28, 2004 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jul 27, 2004 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 21, 2004 | 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. |
| Jul 17, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 7, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 22, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 21, 2004 | GNRU | DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 2004 | AAUD | AMENDMENT OF ALLEGED USE DISAPPROVED | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 9, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 9, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 8, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 8, 2003 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Aug 28, 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. |
| Aug 25, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |