USPTO serial 76559823
PAVIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHANAHAN, PATRICK
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - 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 PAVIT?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robert B. G. Horowitz
Robert B. G. Horowitz Baker & Hostetler LLP45 Rockefeller PlazaNew York, NY 10111UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | USB connected audio/visual/computer data storage media for computers; hard disc drive portable digital audio players; wireless headphones; pre-recorded audio magnetic tapes, IC cards, magnetic discs, optical discs, magneto/optical discs, video discs and video tapes featuring music, movies, pictures, animations and writings;video game apparatus for home use | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Nov 19, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 21, 2006 | 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 20, 2006 | 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 25, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 12, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 16, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 1, 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. |
| May 17, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 8, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |