USPTO serial 78472286
2PAY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRECKENFELD, WILLIAM G
- 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 2PAY?
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
ORMOND BEACH, FL
Internet Transaction Solutions, Inc.
Columbus, OH
Other trademarks owned by Internet Transaction Solutions, Inc.
Internet Transaction Solutions, Inc.
Columbus, OH
Other trademarks owned by Internet Transaction Solutions, Inc.
COLUMBUS, OH
COLUMBUS, OH
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kent D. Stuckey
7720 Rivers Edge DriveSuite 101Columbus, OH 43235-1361Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | Credit card and electronic payment transaction processing services; electronic payment information, namely, electronic processing, returns reconciliation and transmission of bill payment data | 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 2VENTURE LLC
- Other trademarks owned by Internet Transaction Solutions, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Internet Transaction Solutions, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by QUANCOMM INC.
- Other trademarks owned by RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 036
- Similar marks named 2PAY
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 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. |
| Apr 13, 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. |
| Nov 4, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 4, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Oct 31, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Oct 31, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 31, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| 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. |
| Sep 14, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 11, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Mar 11, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2008 | 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. |
| Mar 11, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 13, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Sep 24, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 19, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Sep 12, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Sep 12, 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. |
| Aug 23, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 8, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 31, 2007 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jul 31, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| May 31, 2007 | 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 31, 2007 | 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 14, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 1, 2006 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Dec 1, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 1, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 13, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 13, 2006 | 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 14, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 14, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 14, 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 20, 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 30, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 31, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 28, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 25, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 5, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2005 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 27, 2005 | 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 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 24, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 31, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |