USPTO serial 75584718
E-MAIL.TV
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- REGAN, JOHN B
- 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 E-MAIL.TV?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
James M. Durlacher
JAMES M DURLACHER WOODARD, EMHARDT, NAUGHTONBANK ONE CTR TWR111 MONUMENT CIR STE 3700INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46204-5137Goods 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 Thomson Consumer Electronics, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by THOMSON MULTIMEDIA INC.
- Other trademarks owned by THOMSON MULTIMEDIA INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 036
- Similar marks named E-MAIL.TV
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 11, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 11, 2007 | 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 11, 2007 | INCD | ITU OFFICE ACTION ISSUED FOR DIVISIONAL REQUEST | — |
| May 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 17, 2006 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 23, 2005 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 17, 2005 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 29, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 17, 2004 | NOAM | NOA 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. |
| May 25, 2004 | 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. |
| May 5, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 17, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 13, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 22, 2003 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Apr 2, 2003 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 11, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 18, 2002 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Dec 2, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 28, 2002 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Apr 24, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 24, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 22, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 22, 2001 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Jul 30, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 1, 2001 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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 1, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 23, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 25, 2000 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Aug 16, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 15, 2000 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Aug 15, 2000 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 3, 2000 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Nov 22, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 21, 1999 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| May 7, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |