USPTO serial 76220154
VEGAS.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BELLO, ZACK
- 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 VEGAS.COM?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Dissemination of advertising for others via an on-line electronic communications network | ACTIVE | Jan 1, 1995 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 31, 2009 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Dec 31, 2009 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Feb 25, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 8, 2007 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| May 7, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 29, 2005 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Apr 19, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 19, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 10, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Feb 10, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 13, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Oct 16, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 26, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 4, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 4, 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. |
| May 31, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |