USPTO serial 76619190
JOAN AND MELISSA LIVE FROM THE RED CARPET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KING, LINDA M
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 JOAN AND MELISSA LIVE FROM THE RED CARPET?
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.
Caroline L. Keller
Caroline L. Keller PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLPSuite 2800725 South Figueroa StreetLos Angeles, CA 90017Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely, television programs in the field of entertainment award shows and celebrity interviews broadcast over the media of television, cable and satellite; and providing information In the field of entertainment award shows and celebrity interviews on global computer networks | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by CCF PRODUCTIONS, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by CCF PRODUCTIONS, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named JOAN AND MELISSA LIVE FROM THE RED CARPET
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 9, 2009 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Feb 9, 2009 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Dec 21, 2007 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 21, 2007 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 21, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 11, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 11, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 11, 2007 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Feb 7, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 21, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 21, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 21, 2006 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 21, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 21, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 21, 2006 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jan 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 18, 2005 | 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. |
| Sep 28, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 24, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 19, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 16, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 16, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 9, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 10, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jun 10, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 8, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 15, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |