USPTO serial 78318081
TMAX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HARDY LUDLOW, TARAH KIM
- 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 TMAX?
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
135-280 Seoul, KR
135-280 Seoul, KR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
David Ehrlich
DAVID I GREENBAUM FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU PC866 UNITED NATIONS PLZNEW YORK, NY 10017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail store services featuring computer software; and retail sales by direct solicitation by sales agents in the field of computer software | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 18, 2009 | 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. |
| May 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 16, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 16, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Oct 14, 2008 | PGEX | PETITION GRANTED - EXTENSION REQUEST FILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 10, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Oct 7, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 7, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 6, 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. |
| Aug 6, 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. |
| Apr 17, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 17, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 17, 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. |
| Apr 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 3, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 9, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 30, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 27, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 20, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 20, 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. |
| Sep 8, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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 16, 2006 | CNRT | 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 15, 2006 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jun 10, 2006 | PBCR | WITHDRAWN FROM PUB - OG REVIEW QUERY | — |
| May 15, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 12, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 5, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 3, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 14, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 14, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 25, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 25, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 1, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 1, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 7, 2004 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| May 6, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 10, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |