USPTO serial 78837093
METHOD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SETTLES LEWIS, SHAILA E
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 METHOD?
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
San Francisco, CA
San Francisco, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John W. Crittenden
John W. Crittenden Cooley Godward Kronish LLP101 California Street, 5th FloorSan Francisco, CA 94111-5800UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 15, 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. |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Feb 25, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 1, 2008 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 1, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 31, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 31, 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. |
| Jan 10, 2008 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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 10, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 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. |
| Aug 21, 2007 | 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 1, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 16, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 15, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 14, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 14, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Sep 14, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Aug 30, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 22, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jun 22, 2006 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 20, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |