USPTO serial 78482444
AKIMBI
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARRUTHERS, SUE
- 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 AKIMBI?
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
Mountain View, CA
Mountain View, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Brian R. Coleman
BRIAN R COLEMAN PERKINS COIE LLP101 JEFFERSON DRMENLO PARK, CA 94025UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Virtualization software, namely, computer software that provides a virtual computer infrastructure management platform; virtualization software, namely, computer software for managing, testing and using multiple computer operating systems and multiple computer resources; computer software and hardware for resource virtualization; operating system management software and operating system manipulation 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 26, 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. |
| Feb 26, 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. |
| Jun 20, 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. |
| Mar 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 10, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 3, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 30, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 30, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 9, 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. |
| Jan 9, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 9, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 13, 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. |
| Apr 13, 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. |
| Apr 12, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 12, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |