USPTO serial 78529983
MISERVICE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WILLIS, PAMELA Y
- 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 MISERVICE?
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.
Diane G. Elder
DIANE G ELDER FOLEY & LARDNER LLP321 N CLARK ST STE 2900CHICAGO, IL 60610-4764UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Consultation in the field of telecommunications specifically in the areas of telecommunications applications development and telecommunications application deployment | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | Educational services, namely providing training courses in the field of telecommunications application development and management | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Design for others of custom telecommunications applications; technical support services, namely troubleshooting telecommunication applications through telephone based support, remote diagnostics, on-site visits and preventative maintenance visits | 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 Mitel Networks Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by Mitel Networks Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 038
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named MISERVICE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 20, 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 11, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 11, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 11, 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. |
| Dec 12, 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. |
| Sep 19, 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. |
| Aug 30, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 25, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 20, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 31, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 28, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 9, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 27, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 27, 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 23, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 17, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 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. |
| Dec 29, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 14, 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. |
| Jul 14, 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. |
| Jul 14, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 21, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |