USPTO serial 78334040
SIMPLY PROFITABLE NETWORKS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHHINA, KARANENDRA S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with SIMPLY PROFITABLE NETWORKS?
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.
William D. O'Neill
Julie C. Jennings Senniger Powers LLP100 North Broadway, 17th FloorSt. Louis, MO 63102UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Communications network management applications software | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Consulting services and technical support services, namely, customization of telecom and data network management software, network assessment services, and network software upgrade implementation, all in the field of communications network management | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2009 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Aug 28, 2009 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jan 28, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 28, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 29, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 18, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 11, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 20, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 20, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 16, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 28, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 28, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 28, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 6, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 30, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 28, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 27, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 27, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 16, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 20, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 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. |
| Oct 27, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 26, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 22, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 22, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 18, 2004 | GNPE | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2004 | CPEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT AND/OR PRIORITY ACTION - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 28, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 28, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 15, 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. |
| Jun 13, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 21, 2004 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| May 21, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 21, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 23, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |