USPTO serial 86124227
ETHICS THROUGH INSIGHT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCDORMAN, ROGER THOMAS
- 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 ETHICS THROUGH INSIGHT?
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
Greenwood Village, CO
Greenwood Village, CO
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Emily C. Holmes
EMILY C. HOLMES BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP410 SEVENTEENTH ST STE 2200DENVER, CO 80202-4432UNITED 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Convercent, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Convercent, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Other trademarks in Class 045
- Similar marks named ETHICS THROUGH INSIGHT
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 2, 2016 | 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 2, 2016 | 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. |
| Sep 29, 2015 | 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 4, 2015 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 4, 2015 | 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 15, 2015 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 27, 2015 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 24, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 8, 2015 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 8, 2015 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 8, 2015 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 8, 2015 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 8, 2015 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 10, 2014 | 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. |
| Nov 10, 2014 | 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. |
| Nov 10, 2014 | 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 20, 2014 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 20, 2014 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2014 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2014 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 14, 2014 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Mar 14, 2014 | 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. |
| Mar 14, 2014 | 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. |
| Mar 6, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 5, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 23, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |