Drawing for THINKING BEYOND THE EDGE

USPTO serial 78501640

THINKING BEYOND THE EDGE

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 606
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
Examiner
MICHELI, ANGELA M
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 THINKING BEYOND THE EDGE?

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

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
009mobile broadcasting system comprised of LED and projection screens of variable sizes, electric generators, audio and visual components, cameras, amplifiers, video projectors, a self-contained broadcasting control room and an automated mechanized lifting arm for raising LED and projection screensACTIVE
042Providing technical support and trouble-shooting services for computer hardware and computer software to users of customized mobile broadcasting system comprised of LED and projection screens of variable sizes, electric generators, audio and visual components, cameras, amplifiers, video projectors, a self-contained broadcasting control room and an automated mechanized lifting arm for raising LED and projection screens; providing design and development services for others of the aforementioned mobile broadcasting systemsACTIVE

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Mar 21, 2007UNDNUNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN
Jan 22, 2007MAB6ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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 22, 2007ABN6ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILEDThe 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 14, 2006UNDNUNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN
Jun 6, 2006MAILPAPER RECEIVED
May 23, 2006NOAMNOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANTA 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 17, 2006UNDNUNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN
Mar 13, 2006MAILPAPER RECEIVED
Feb 28, 2006PUBOPUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITIONYour 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.
Feb 8, 2006NPUBNOTICE OF PUBLICATION
Jan 19, 2006PREVLAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED
Jan 13, 2006ALIEASSIGNED TO LIE
Dec 29, 2005CNSAAPPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER
Aug 1, 2005WOAGWITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY GRANTED
Aug 1, 2005WOARTEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED
Aug 1, 2005WOAGWITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY GRANTED
Aug 1, 2005WOARTEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED
May 26, 2005GPRAPRIORITY ACTION E-MAILEDA 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.
May 26, 2005CPRAPRIORITY ACTION WRITTENA 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.
May 19, 2005DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER
Apr 8, 2005TCCATEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
Oct 26, 2004NWAPNEW APPLICATION ENTERED

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance