USPTO serial 76513370
ONE LINK MEDIA SYSTEMS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CLARK, GLENN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with ONE LINK MEDIA SYSTEMS?
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.
Kirstin M. Jahn
KIRSTIN M JAHN JAHN & ASSOCIATES, LLC565 CALIFORNIA AVERENO, NV 89509UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely providing displays to a game of chance which is conducted simultaneously among multiple gaming machines or gaming tables either within a casino/resort or among various casinos/resorts for customer play | ACTIVE | Sep 16, 2003 |
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 14, 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. |
| Dec 14, 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. |
| May 18, 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. |
| May 18, 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. |
| May 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 26, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 18, 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. |
| Jan 17, 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. |
| Nov 22, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 22, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 22, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 18, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 22, 2004 | 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 21, 2004 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Apr 10, 2004 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 15, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Mar 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 15, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 30, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 30, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 30, 2003 | 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. |
| Sep 25, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |