USPTO serial 77074141
ITVCITY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MEYERS, MORGAN LAURA
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 ITVCITY?
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
Ridgewood, NY
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Broadcasting services and provision of telecommunication access to video and audio content provided via a video-on-demand service via the Internet; Communications services, namely, transmitting streamed sound and audio-visual recordings via the Internet; Internet cafe services, namely, providing telecommunications connections to the internet in a cafe environment; Internet service provider (ISP); Internet telephony services; Providing multiple user dial-up and dedicated access to the Internet; Providing remote Internet access; Providing voice communication services via the Internet; Streaming of audio material on the Internet; Streaming of video material on the Internet; Voice over internet protocol (VOIP) services | ACTIVE | Dec 31, 2006 |
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 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 27, 2007 | 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 1, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 16, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 21, 2007 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Jan 21, 2007 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 6, 2007 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jan 5, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |