USPTO serial 78321296
INGRAM MICRO TECHNOLOGY MISSION
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FOSDICK, GEOFFREY 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 INGRAM MICRO TECHNOLOGY MISSION?
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.
Grant R. Clayton, Alan J. Howarth, Karl R. Cannon, Terrence J. Edwards, Brett J. Davis, David N. Preece, Wesley M. Lang
GRANT R. CLAYTON CLAYTON, HOWARTH & CANNON, P.C.P.O. BOX 1909SANDY, UT 84091UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware; computer software, namely, computer software for use in business and government environments in the field of networking, wireless communication security technology and home entertainment; computer hardware, namely, point-of-sale POS/automated-identification-and-data-collection AIDC/barcode and storage devices, imaging devices, computer peripherals | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Mar 28, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 30, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 22, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 7, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Sep 7, 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. |
| Jun 21, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 7, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 7, 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. |
| Sep 7, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 7, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 7, 2006 | 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 7, 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. |
| Dec 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 23, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 20, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Sep 3, 2005 | PBCR | WITHDRAWN FROM PUB - OG REVIEW QUERY | — |
| Jul 19, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 15, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 18, 2005 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 18, 2005 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 17, 2005 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Dec 8, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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 7, 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. |
| Dec 6, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 19, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 14, 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 12, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 21, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |