USPTO serial 78590837
GRID ANALYTICS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RHIM, ANDREW
- 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 GRID ANALYTICS?
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.
Shelly L. McGee
Shelly L. McGee HOGAN & HARTSON L.L.P.555 13TH ST NW STE 800EWASHINGTON, DC 20004-1161UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer systems comprised of computer hardware and computer software for receiving, transmitting and responding to requests for information among multiple computer systems and databases at different locations for searching, collecting, aggregating, reporting, and transmitting information and data among multiple computer systems and databases at different locations, and for receiving aggregated data and information in response to requests for information from multiple computer systems and databases at different locations | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Information services for facilitating the searching, collection, aggregation, analysis, reporting, transmission and exchange of data and information, namely, providing information at the specific request of end users by means of the Internet | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 15, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2009 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 10, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Aug 13, 2009 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Aug 13, 2009 | 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 12, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Feb 12, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 7, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 30, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 30, 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. |
| Feb 12, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 18, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 18, 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. |
| Aug 29, 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. |
| Feb 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 21, 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. |
| Nov 1, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 29, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 27, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 20, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 18, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 11, 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. |
| May 30, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| May 30, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| May 9, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Oct 11, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |