USPTO serial 75841488
CLUBTV
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AXILBUND, MELVIN
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 CLUBTV?
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.
Christopher M. Cooper
CHRISTOPHER M COOPER CHRISTOPHER M COOPER CO LPA1724 E LIVINGSTON AVECOLUMBUS, OH 43205UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | service mark will be used to identify and distinguish applicant's television media broadcast, communications, including broadcast/transmission of television media | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2009 | PCDE | PETITION TO DIRECTOR DENIED | — |
| Feb 10, 2009 | PILM | PETITION INQUIRY LETTER ISSUED | — |
| Jan 16, 2009 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 10, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Dec 9, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Nov 28, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 28, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 8, 2008 | CORV | REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 26, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 25, 2001 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Jan 25, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 28, 2000 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 6, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |