USPTO serial 79036960
GREENPHONE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 402
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KUNG, KAELIE ELIZABETH
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 GREENPHONE?
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.
Sheldon H. Klein
SHELDON H. KLEIN ARENT FOX LLP1050 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W.WASHINGTON, DCUNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Development tools for computer programs; mobile development devices for use by software developers to develop computer programs to run as applications on a mobile telecommunications device; mobile telecommunications devices incorporating capabilities of a telephone, video/still camera, personal digital assistant, and wireless transmitter/receiver of information and data over the Internet, and other applications | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
| 042 | Design for others, development, maintenance and updating of computer software products; consulting services in the field of design, implementation and use of computer hardware and software systems for others | SECTION 70 - CANCELLED | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 11, 2017 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Jul 29, 2017 | DENA | NOTIFICATION OF EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF INTL REG MAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2017 | DETH | DEATH OF INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION | — |
| Dec 22, 2013 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 16, 2013 | NREP | NEW REPRESENTATIVE AT IB RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 16, 2009 | FINT | FINAL DECISION TRANSACTION PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Jul 24, 2009 | FICS | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 24, 2009 | FICR | FINAL DISPOSITION NOTICE CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Nov 7, 2008 | OPNX | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION - PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| Oct 23, 2008 | OPNS | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION SENT TO IB | — |
| Oct 23, 2008 | OPNR | NOTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE OPPOSITION CREATED, TO BE SENT TO IB | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 2008 | EXAR | TEAS EXPRESS ABANDONMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 8, 2008 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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 7, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 16, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 4, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 28, 2007 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Dec 28, 2007 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jun 22, 2007 | RFNT | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY IB | — |
| May 31, 2007 | RFCS | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED - REFUSAL SENT TO IB | — |
| May 30, 2007 | RFRR | REFUSAL PROCESSED BY MPU | — |
| May 26, 2007 | RFCR | NON-FINAL ACTION (IB REFUSAL) PREPARED FOR REVIEW | — |
| May 25, 2007 | 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. |
| May 18, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 18, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |
| May 17, 2007 | REPR | SN ASSIGNED FOR SECT 66A APPL FROM IB | — |
| Jan 4, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |