USPTO serial 78539225
SIMURBAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CLARK, ROBERT C
- 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 SIMURBAN?
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.
Brian D. Krantz
BRIAN D KRANTZ LAW OFFICE OF BRIAN D KRANTZ4929 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 601LOS ANGELES, CA 90010-3820UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for the creation, management and use of data bases for city planning, other simulated urban modelling, and for storing and distributing information regarding city planning and urban modelling | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Computer software and data base development, computer software and data base development consultation, and computer software design and programming for others in connection with city planning and other simulated urban modelling | 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 Simmersion Holdings Pty Limited
- Other trademarks owned by Simmersion Holdings Pty Limited
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named SIMURBAN
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 17, 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 7, 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. |
| May 9, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 24, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 24, 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 26, 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. |
| Aug 15, 2006 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 1, 2006 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 31, 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. |
| Jan 11, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 16, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 9, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 2, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 2, 2005 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 10, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 10, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 3, 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. |
| Nov 2, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 2, 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. |
| Aug 2, 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. |
| Aug 2, 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. |
| Aug 1, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 12, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |