USPTO serial 76361994
METRO CONNECT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ERVIN, INGA
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 METRO CONNECT?
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.
Sanford E. Warren, Jr., David L. Odom, Ruben C. DeLeon, R. Scott Rhoades, Brandon J. Lee
DAVID L ODOM AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLPPO BOX 688DALLAS, TX 75313-0688UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, NAMELY, THE ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION OF VOICE AND DATA; PROVIDING WIRELESS VOICE AND DATA COMMUNICATION SERVICES AND WIRELESS TELEPHONE SERVICES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 8, 2013 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Sep 17, 2007 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 21, 2007 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jul 21, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Apr 11, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Dec 18, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 18, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 8, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 8, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 8, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 2, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 20, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 24, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jun 14, 2006 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 30, 2005 | 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 30, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Oct 28, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 8, 2005 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Sep 14, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 10, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 13, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 13, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 13, 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. |
| Apr 16, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |