USPTO serial 77212082
3D.NY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAVACHE, 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 3D.NY?
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.
Carolyn S. Lu
Carolyn S. Lu PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP725 S FIGUEROA ST STE 2800LOS ANGELES, CA 90017-5406UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Broadcasting services and provision of telecommunication access to films and tv programs provided via a video-on-demand service; Communications services, namely, transmitting streamed sound and audio-visual recordings via the Internet; Delivery of messages by electronic transmission; Electronic mail services; Electronic transmission of messages and data; Electronic, electric, and digital transmission of voice, data, images, signals, and messages; Instant messaging services; Pay-per-view television transmission services; Providing multiple-user access to a global computer information network; Providing on-line chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among users in the field of general interest; Video broadcasting; Video-on-demand transmission services | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 13, 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. |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Feb 20, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 20, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 20, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 25, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 25, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 25, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2008 | 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 18, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 28, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 14, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 9, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 1, 2007 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF PRIORITY ACTION E-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. |
| Oct 1, 2007 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-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. |
| Oct 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 24, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 26, 2007 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Jun 25, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |