USPTO serial 85162017
MOBILEMED
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HWANG, JOHN C B
- 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 MOBILEMED?
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.
Vandana Balakrishnan
VANDANA BALAKRISHNAN RAJ ABHYANKER, P.C.1580 W EL CAMINO REAL STE 8MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA 94040-2462UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer programs and downloadable software, namely, a mobile medical computing device: to record locations of physician or other authorized care provider and pharmacy visits, using a global positioning satellite access feature of the mobile medical computing device; to create a centralized database regarding local care resources from the recorded locations; to access negotiated reduced prices for preferred health care products from web-based information sources; to display the negotiated reduced prices for viewing by the user; to record a conversation between a user of the device and a health care provider for later review by the user; to automatically transcribe the recorded conversation for output; to access one or more web-based patient portals; to download medical history records of a patient from the one or more web-based portals, based upon a user profile including personal information that uniquely identifies the patient; to output data from the downloaded medical history to an authorized care provider; to provide a series of screen images and textual information and/or voice data relating to the screen images, describing a logical information flow of a standard physician's or other authorized care provider's office visit; to provide access to a database that shows differential diagnoses | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2013 | 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. |
| May 20, 2013 | 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. |
| Dec 1, 2012 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 30, 2012 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 29, 2012 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 28, 2012 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2012 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Nov 28, 2012 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 28, 2012 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 19, 2012 | 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. |
| Nov 19, 2012 | 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 18, 2012 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 30, 2012 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 28, 2012 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 28, 2012 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 28, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2011 | NOAM | NOA E-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 23, 2011 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 23, 2011 | 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. |
| Jul 19, 2011 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 12, 2011 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 12, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 12, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 20, 2011 | 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 7, 2011 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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 7, 2011 | 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 7, 2011 | 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 7, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 2, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Nov 1, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 30, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |