USPTO serial 86562579
SOAR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KEATING, MICHAEL P
- 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 SOAR?
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
Manhattan Beach, CA
Manhattan Beach, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Paul D. Supnik
PAUL D. SUPNIK Law Office Of Paul D Supnik9401 Wilshire Blvd Ste 1250Beverly Hills, CA 90212-2945UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | consulting in the field of engineering, and computer hardware and software systems and processes; engineering services and engineering consultation relating to identifying, assessing and prioritizing industrial and factory processes; engineering consultation relating to incident investigation of manufacturing and factory procedures and processes which have resulted in catastrophic outcomes; engineering process design; environmental, transportation, safety, plant, and mechanical and materials engineering services; providing a website featuring information in the fields of engineering, computer hardware and software systems and processes, process design and environmental, transportation, safety, plant, and mechanical and materials engineering services | 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 22, 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. |
| May 22, 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. |
| Oct 12, 2016 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2016 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 10, 2016 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 10, 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. |
| Apr 19, 2016 | 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. |
| Feb 23, 2016 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 23, 2016 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 2016 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 15, 2016 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 8, 2016 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 8, 2016 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 8, 2016 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2016 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 8, 2016 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 29, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 29, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 29, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 9, 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. |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Jun 16, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 24, 2015 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 16, 2015 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |