USPTO serial 76064970
STARCUT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SWAIN, MICHELE LYNN
- 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 STARCUT?
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
HELSINKI, FI
FIN-00130 HELSINKI, FI
02150 Espoo, FI
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert A. Rosenbloum, Esq., Neil P. Kearney, Esq.
Robert A. Rosenbloum, Esq., Neil P. Kearney, Esq. GREENBERG TRAUIG LLP3290 NORTHSIDE PARKWAY - SUITE 400ATLANTA, GA 30327UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR WIRELESS APPLICATIONS FOR TRANSMITTING ENTERTAINMENT DATA AND INFORMATION VIA COMPUTER AND WIRELESS TERMINALS, AND COMPUTER SOFTWARE FOR WIRELESS TERMINALS FOR DISPLAYING OPERATOR LOGOS, SCREEN SAVERS, DESKTOP WALLPAPERS, GRAPHIC APPLICATION GROUP ICONS AND FOR PLAYING RINGING TONES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 13, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 13, 2009 | 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. |
| Nov 14, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 13, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 12, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Nov 12, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 23, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 13, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 2, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 7, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 7, 2007 | 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 31, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 18, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 13, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 13, 2006 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 13, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 27, 2006 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Aug 8, 2005 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Aug 8, 2005 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 16, 2004 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| Jun 8, 2004 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| May 18, 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. |
| Apr 28, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 26, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 17, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 20, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 20, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 19, 2003 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 27, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 5, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 2, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 21, 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 11, 2001 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 15, 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. |
| Dec 12, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |