Home ›
Trademark Categories ›
Science & Technology Services ›
1999 ›
SA ›
SAATCHI & SAATCHI IDEAS
Trademark search for:
SAATCHI & SAATCHI IDEAS
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
1999-12-22 — Application filed
2000-05-18 — Assigned to examiner
2000-06-05 — Assigned to examiner
2000-06-07 — Final disposition recorded
2000-10-25 — Correspondence received in law office
2001-02-27 — Office action issued
2001-08-24 — Correspondence received in law office
2001-11-23 — Approved for pub - principal register
2002-04-24 — Notice of publication
2002-05-14 — Published for opposition
2002-08-06 — Noa mailed - sou required from applicant
2003-01-31 — Sou extension 1 filed
2003-02-03 — Paper received
2003-04-21 — Sou extension 1 granted
2003-07-21 — Sec. 44(e) claim added
2003-07-31 — Paper received
2003-07-31 — Petition to director received
2003-08-06 — Notice of allowance cancelled
2003-09-09 — Petition to director granted
2003-11-04 — Sec. 1(b) claim deleted
2004-03-24 — Notice of publication
2004-04-13 — Published for opposition
2004-07-06 — Registered-principal register
2007-05-29 — Case file in ticrs
2011-02-11 — Cancelled sec. 8 (6-yr)
2011-02-11 — Final status recorded
Owner Information
Saatchi & Saatchi Holdings Limited
London W1A 4XA GB
Saatchi & Saatchi Holdings Limited
London W1A 4XA GB
Saatchi & Saatchi Holdings Limited
London W1A 4XA GB
Correspondent
SUSAN UPTON DOUGLASS FROSS ZELNICK LEHRMAN & ZISSU PC 866 UNITED NATIONS PLZ NEW YORK, NY 10017 UNITED STATES
Filing Details
Filing Date:
1999-12-22
Status Date:
2011-02-11
Disclaimer: This page is informational only and does not constitute legal advice.
Trademark availability depends on jurisdiction, usage, and legal interpretation.