USPTO serial 78672131
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
Pennington, NJ
Pennington, NJ
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Rachel Lilienthal Stark
Rachel Lilienthal Stark STARK & STARK, PC993 LENOX DR BLDG 2LAWRENCEVILLE, NJ 08648-2316UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Design and development of computer software, computer software consulting services, application service provider, namely hosting computer software applications of others, and hosting of digital content on the Internet for the use of others | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 30, 2009 | 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 30, 2009 | 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. |
| Oct 30, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 30, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 27, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 27, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 28, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 24, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Mar 24, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 24, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 28, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 27, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 27, 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. |
| Mar 30, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 29, 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. |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| May 17, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 7, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 3, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 30, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 7, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 21, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 21, 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. |
| Feb 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 6, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 21, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |