USPTO serial 76364344
TIGERTV.COM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Reg. 2845625Status 710
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- May 25, 2004
- Examiner
- WAHLBERG, STACY B
- Law office
- GENERIC WEB UPDATE
What this means
Status 710 means the registration was cancelled because a required Section 8 declaration of continued use was not filed within the deadline (including any grace period). The federal registration is no longer active. Evaluate filing a new application if you still use the mark, or petition if cancellation was erroneous. Consult counsel on remaining common-law rights.
Need help with TIGERTV.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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Joshua W. Newman
Joshua W. Newman Reed Smith LLP10 South Wacker Drive, 40th FloorChicago, IL 60606-7507UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail store services available online and via television featuring computers and computer related products | SECTION 8 - CANCELLED | Mar 2, 2002 |
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 TIGER DIRECT, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by TIGER DIRECT, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by SYSTEMAX INC.
- Other trademarks owned by TIGER DIRECT, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Similar marks named TIGERTV.COM
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2024 | CAEX | CANCELLED SEC. 8 (10-YR)/EXPIRED SECTION 9 | — |
| May 25, 2023 | REM2 | COURTESY REMINDER - SEC. 8 (10-YR)/SEC. 9 E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2020 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2020 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 14, 2020 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 10, 2016 | 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 10, 2016 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 30, 2015 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jun 12, 2014 | NA89 | NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF SEC. 8 & 9 - E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 12, 2014 | RNL1 | REGISTERED AND RENEWED (FIRST RENEWAL - 10 YRS) | The trademark registration was renewed for another 10-year term after acceptable maintenance filings. RNL1, RNL2, and RNL3 indicate which renewal cycle (first, second, or third 10-year term) was recorded. The registration remains active. |
| Jun 12, 2014 | 89AG | REGISTERED - SEC. 8 (10-YR) ACCEPTED/SEC. 9 GRANTED | The USPTO accepted your combined Section 8 declaration and Section 9 renewal application. The registration is renewed for another 10-year term. The next combined maintenance filing will be due at the following 10-year anniversary. |
| Jun 12, 2014 | APRE | CASE ASSIGNED TO POST REGISTRATION PARALEGAL | — |
| May 23, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 23, 2014 | E89R | TEAS SECTION 8 & 9 RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 30, 2011 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Dec 16, 2010 | C15A | REGISTERED - SEC. 8 (6-YR) ACCEPTED & SEC. 15 ACK. | — |
| Dec 13, 2010 | APRE | CASE ASSIGNED TO POST REGISTRATION PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 24, 2010 | E815 | TEAS SECTION 8 & 15 RECEIVED | — |
| May 25, 2004 | R.PR | REGISTERED-PRINCIPAL REGISTER | Your trademark is registered on the Principal Register — the strongest form of federal trademark protection. You may use the ® symbol for the covered goods and services. Maintenance filings (Section 8 and renewals) are required to keep the registration alive. |
| Mar 18, 2004 | CNPR | ALLOWED PRINCIPAL REGISTER - SOU ACCEPTED | — |
| Mar 18, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 17, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 9, 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. |
| Sep 16, 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. |
| Aug 27, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 17, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 16, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 27, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 23, 2003 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 6, 2003 | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 17, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 20, 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. |
| May 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 15, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 22, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 22, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |