USPTO serial 78315876
SIMPLE AS IT SHOULD BE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KHAN, ASMAT A
- 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 SIMPLE AS IT SHOULD BE?
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.
JACQUELINE P. SCHEIB
JACQUELINE P. SCHEIB ROBINSON & COLE LLP280 TRUMBULL STHARTFORD, CT 06103-3597UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | Postal machines for processing, feeding, conveying, sealing, franking, and addressing mail and packages and instruction manuals sold therewith; document handling equipment, namely, folding machines and inserting machines, and instruction manuals sold therewith | ACTIVE | — |
| 009 | Computer hardware and instruction manuals sold therewith; computer firmware and software for processing, shipping and tracking of mail and parcels and instruction manuals sold therewith; postal machines, scales and meters for weighing, sorting and metering mail and packages and instruction manuals sold therewith | ACTIVE | — |
| 035 | Business services, namely, postage meter resetting services and shipping logistics management consultation; leasing of postal machines for processing, feeding, conveying, sealing, franking, and addressing mail and packages, document handling equipment, namely, folding machines and inserting machines, and postal machines, scales and meters for weighing, sorting and metering mail and packages | ACTIVE | — |
| 037 | Installation, maintenance and repair services in the field of machines and equipment for processing, shipping, and tracking mail and packages | ACTIVE | — |
| 038 | Electronic mail services | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Computerized mailing and shipping services, namely, providing temporary use of online non-downloadable computer software for preparing shipping and mailing documents and for shipment processing over computer networks, Intranets and the Internet and for preparing and providing shipping-mailing data consolidation, reporting, and analysis over computer networks, Intranets and the Internet; technical support services, namely, troubleshooting of computer hardware and software problems and equipment for processing mail and parcels; maintenance of computer software and firmware; leasing computer hardware, computer firmware and software for processing, shipping and tracking of mail and parcels | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Neopost Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Neopost Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 007
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 037
- Other trademarks in Class 038
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named SIMPLE AS IT SHOULD BE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 25, 2008 | 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 25, 2008 | 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 18, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 18, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 21, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 18, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jun 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 25, 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. |
| Apr 5, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 15, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 28, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 3, 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. |
| Oct 3, 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. |
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Apr 8, 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. |
| Mar 8, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 26, 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. |
| Apr 23, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 4, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |