USPTO serial 78481909
SIMPLY EFFECTIVE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NADELMAN, ANDREA KOYNER
- 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 SIMPLY EFFECTIVE?
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.
Susan E. Hollander, , Gail I. Nevius Abbas, and Christine M. Klenk,
SUSAN E. HOLLANDER, MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP1001 PAGE MILL ROAD, BUILDING 2PALO ALTO, CA 94304UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 005 | Turf algaecide, turf fungicide and turf pesticide for agricultural and domestic use; insecticides, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, rodenticides, miticides, parasiticides for domestic use; biological insect spray concentrate for outdoor home and garden use; soil fungicides, dry granular herbicides sold to professional nurseries and lawn care services and used in connection with turf and ornamental plantings; animal repellents, insect repellents, insect repellent in topical form, fire ant bait, fire ant granules, fire ant killers for domestic use; herbicides mixed with fertilizers for domestic use; pesticide, namely slug and snail bait for domestic use | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 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. |
| Jan 26, 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. |
| Jul 2, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 27, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 27, 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. |
| Jan 17, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 21, 2007 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 21, 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 6, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 25, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 25, 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 27, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 19, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Jun 20, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 15, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 1, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 1, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 4, 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. |
| Sep 14, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 16, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 10, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 9, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 8, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 23, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 15, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 15, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 8, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 17, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |