USPTO serial 78298854
DNA PLATFORM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- PINO, BRIAN
- 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 DNA PLATFORM?
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.
John W. Goldschmidt
John W. Goldschmidt Dilworth Paxson LLP1500 Market StreetSuite 3500EPhiladelphia, PA 19102Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for providing managed remote access services, namely, for providing secure, general purpose connectivity so that a variety of computer software applications and computer network-based services, file sharing services, e-mail services, and intranet services can be securely accessed by a user connecting remotely to the enterprise local area network (LAN) | 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 23, 2009 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 16, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Apr 16, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 19, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 18, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 20, 2006 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 20, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 30, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 30, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 18, 2006 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Dec 6, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 2005 | CNFR | 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 25, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 20, 2005 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 14, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 14, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 13, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 13, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| May 5, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 22, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 16, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 22, 2004 | 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 22, 2004 | CNFR | 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 12, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 23, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 23, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 23, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |