USPTO serial 78273069
NYFIX SILENT PARTNER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NEVILLE, BRIAN
- 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 NYFIX SILENT PARTNER?
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
Stamford, CT
Stamford, CT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jason M. Drangel
JASON M DRANGEL EPSTEIN DRANGEL BAZERMAN & JAMES LLP60 E 42ND ST STE 820NEW YORK, NY 10165UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software and hardware used for providing a securities, equities, currencies, futures and options trading system; computer software for conducting trades over electronic communications networks, computer software for the storage, organization, execution and management of trade orders | ACTIVE | — |
| 036 | Financial trading services, namely, utilizing hardware and software for providing order routing, execution, management and messaging for the securities, equities, currencies, futures and options marketplace; financial services, namely, electronic securities, equities, currencies, futures and options trading service | 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 17, 2007 | 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 17, 2007 | 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 15, 2006 | 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 23, 2006 | 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 3, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 3, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 24, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 9, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 25, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 25, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 25, 2005 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| May 24, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 3, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 21, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 18, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 10, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 15, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 13, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Feb 1, 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 20, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |