USPTO serial 85353453
SERVICE FACTORY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SEVERSON, KAREN
- 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 SERVICE FACTORY?
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
Mountain View, CA
Mountain View, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Connie L. Ellerbach
Connie L. Ellerbach Fenwick & West, LLP801 California StreetSilicon Valley CenterMountain View, CA 94041Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Project management services for others for business purposes in the fields of multimedia design, custom writing, language translation, legal office administration, sales, marketing, finance, bookkeeping, business consulting, advertising, business management, business administration; and providing office functions | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Computer project management services for others in the fields of web development, programming, software development, software programming, web design, product design, engineering, multimedia development and manufacturing software development | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2015 | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2015 | 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. |
| Nov 4, 2014 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2014 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 30, 2014 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2014 | 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 28, 2014 | 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. |
| Oct 28, 2014 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 21, 2014 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Aug 20, 2014 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 19, 2014 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - MAILED | — |
| Aug 18, 2014 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Aug 18, 2014 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 18, 2014 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 30, 2014 | 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. |
| Jun 30, 2014 | 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 27, 2014 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 10, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2013 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 26, 2013 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 26, 2013 | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 2013 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 6, 2013 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| May 8, 2013 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 8, 2013 | 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 27, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2012 | 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. |
| Sep 12, 2012 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 28, 2012 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 24, 2012 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Aug 24, 2012 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 24, 2012 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 24, 2012 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 16, 2012 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 6, 2012 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 2012 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION 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. |
| Jun 6, 2012 | 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. |
| May 10, 2012 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| May 10, 2012 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 10, 2012 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 18, 2012 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 18, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 13, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 2, 2012 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 12, 2011 | 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. |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Oct 3, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 29, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jun 25, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |