USPTO serial 78682018
OPENVISTA ENTERPRISE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BLANDU, FLORENTINA
- 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 OPENVISTA ENTERPRISE?
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.
Thomas H. Zellerbach, Esq. & Diana Rutowski, Esq.
Thomas H. Zellerbach, Esq. & Diana Rutowski, Esq. ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP4 PARK PLAZA, SUITE 1600IP PROSECUTION DEPARTMENTIRVINE, CA 92614-2558Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software, downloadable software, and hardware for use in the healthcare field, namely, for managing, storing, analyzing, maintaining, processing, structuring, reviewing, building, editing, distributing, communicating, organizing, sharing, referencing, monitoring and integrating healthcare information; computer software, downloadable software, and hardware for automating clinical, administrative and financial processes in the healthcare field | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 14, 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. |
| Dec 14, 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. |
| May 13, 2009 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| May 13, 2009 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| May 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. |
| Nov 24, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 13, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 12, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Nov 12, 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. |
| May 14, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| May 14, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 14, 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. |
| Sep 25, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 25, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Sep 25, 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. |
| May 14, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 14, 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. |
| Nov 14, 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 22, 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 2, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 29, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 27, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 21, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 21, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 8, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 8, 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 20, 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 18, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 18, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 5, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |