Home ›
Trademark Categories ›
Advertising & Business ›
2011 ›
SC ›
SCORE METHODOLOGY
Trademark search for:
SCORE METHODOLOGY
No active United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) registrations found, based on publicly available USPTO trademark records.
Trademark records may change over time.
For the most up-to-date trademark status, domain availability,
and social handle checks, run a live search.
Check latest trademark, domains & social handles
Live search · Most up-to-date results
USPTO Filing History
Key events recorded for this trademark application
2011-04-13 — Application filed
2011-04-16 — Application filed
2011-04-18 — Application filed
2011-07-19 — Assigned to examiner
2011-07-27 — Final disposition recorded
2011-07-27 — Final disposition recorded
2011-07-27 — Final disposition recorded
2011-12-08 — Assigned to examiner
2012-01-26 — Office action issued
2012-02-07 — Assigned to lie
2012-02-27 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2012-02-27 — Correspondence received in law office
2012-03-19 — Suspension letter written
2012-03-19 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
2012-03-19 — Notification of letter of suspension e-mailed
2012-09-19 — Suspension checked - to attorney for action
2012-09-26 — Suspension inquiry written
2012-09-26 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
2012-09-26 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
2013-03-26 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
2013-03-26 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2013-03-26 — Correspondence received in law office
2013-04-20 — Suspension letter written
2013-04-20 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
2013-04-20 — Notification of letter of suspension e-mailed
2013-10-22 — Suspension checked - to attorney for action
2013-10-29 — Suspension inquiry written
2013-10-29 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
2013-10-29 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
2014-04-29 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
2014-04-29 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
2014-04-29 — Correspondence received in law office
2014-04-30 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2014-05-21 — Suspension letter written
2014-05-21 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
2014-05-21 — Notification of letter of suspension e-mailed
2014-11-24 — Suspension inquiry written
2014-11-24 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
2014-11-24 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
2015-05-26 — Attorney/dom.rep.revoked and/or appointed
2015-05-26 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
2015-05-26 — Teas revoke/app/change addr of atty/dom rep received
2015-06-04 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2015-06-04 — Correspondence received in law office
2015-06-08 — Suspension letter written
2015-06-08 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
2015-06-08 — Notification of letter of suspension e-mailed
2015-12-09 — Suspension inquiry written
2015-12-09 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
2015-12-09 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
2016-06-09 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
2016-06-11 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2016-06-11 — Correspondence received in law office
2016-06-13 — Suspension letter written
2016-06-13 — Letter of suspension e-mailed
2016-06-13 — Notification of letter of suspension e-mailed
2016-12-13 — Suspension inquiry written
2016-12-13 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
2016-12-13 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
2017-06-13 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
2017-06-14 — Teas/email correspondence entered
2017-06-14 — Correspondence received in law office
2017-06-27 — Office action issued
2017-06-27 — Office action issued
2017-06-27 — Office action issued
2017-11-07 — Teas change of correspondence received
2018-01-23 — Application abandoned
2018-01-23 — Application abandoned
2018-01-23 — Final status recorded
Owner Information
AppLabs Technologies Private Limited
Hyderabad - 500 019 IN
Correspondent
CHARLES G. ZUG NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 301 S. College St. Suite 2300, IP Department CHARLOTTE, NC 28202
Filing Details
Filing Date:
2011-04-13
Status Date:
2018-01-23
Disclaimer: This page is informational only and does not constitute legal advice.
Trademark availability depends on jurisdiction, usage, and legal interpretation.