USPTO serial 78269952
MAPSOLUTE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BOAGNI, MARY
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 MAPSOLUTE?
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
65760 Eschborn, DE
65760 ESCHBORN, DE
65760 ESCHBORN, DE
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jeanette S. Zimmer
JEANETTE S ZIMMER SCHIFF HARDIN & WAITEPO BOX 06079CHICAGO, IL 60606-0079UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Internet portal services, namely telecommunications services providing website users access to maps, routing information and location information | 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 19, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 14, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 14, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 24, 2008 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| May 3, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Oct 26, 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. |
| Oct 26, 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. |
| Oct 5, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | 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 16, 2006 | 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 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2006 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 22, 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. |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Dec 8, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 19, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 4, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 30, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 30, 2004 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 30, 2004 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 8, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 3, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 10, 2004 | 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. |
| Jan 9, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |