USPTO serial 75911941
ETEAMS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RAUEN, JAMES
- 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 ETEAMS?
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
Los Angeles, CA
LA JOLLA, CA
LA JOLLA, CA
LA JOLLA, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Matthew A. Newboles
MATTHEW A NEWBOLES STETINA BRUNDA GARRED & BRUCKER75 ENTERPRISE STE 250ALISO VIEJO, CA 92656UNITED STATESGoods 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 eteamz.com Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by ACTIVE NETWORK, INC., THE
- Other trademarks owned by ACTIVE.COM, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by ACTIVE NETWORK, INC., THE
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Other trademarks in Class 042
- Similar marks named ETEAMS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2005 | 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 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 8, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 8, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 12, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 8, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 8, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2003 | 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. |
| Jan 14, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 25, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 14, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 21, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 21, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 21, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 17, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 30, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 30, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 17, 2002 | 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 14, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 12, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 12, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 12, 2002 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Jan 10, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Apr 24, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 29, 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. |
| Mar 29, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 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. |
| Jul 24, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 14, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |