USPTO serial 86445863
CCDX
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- OLANDRIA, WARREN
- 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 CCDX?
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 Diego, CA
San Diego, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Merle Richman
MERLE RICHMAN MERLE W RICHMAN, ESQ.PO BOX 3333LA JOLLA, CA 92038-3333UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | computer software for exchanging healthcare related records including continuity of care documents | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Application service provider services, namely, providing software for exchanging healthcare related records including continuity of care documents and providing consultation services for computer systems and applications related to exchanging healthcare related records including continuity of care documents; Software as a service, namely, providing software for exchanging healthcare related records including continuity of care documents and providing consultation services for computer systems and applications related to exchanging healthcare related records including continuity of care documents | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 24, 2017 | 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. |
| Jul 24, 2017 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2017 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2017 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 7, 2017 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Mar 24, 2017 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 23, 2017 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Mar 23, 2017 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 23, 2017 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 23, 2017 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2017 | 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 22, 2016 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 24, 2016 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2016 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 22, 2016 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2016 | 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. |
| Dec 22, 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. |
| Oct 27, 2015 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Oct 7, 2015 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2015 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 19, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 24, 2015 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 15, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 14, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 14, 2015 | 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 24, 2015 | 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 24, 2015 | 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 24, 2015 | 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 17, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 14, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |