USPTO serial 77817734
BAD ROBOT OPTICAL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROACH, APRIL K
- 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 BAD ROBOT OPTICAL?
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
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Andrew D. Price
Andrew D. Price Venable LLP575 7th Street, NWWashington, DC 20004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely, television and film production; film and television visual effects production services; film and television production services; web content production services, namely, production of television shows and films broadcast via the internet; visual effects, animation and special effects production and distribution services for film, television, and web media, namely, preparation of special effects, visual effects and animation production services and distribution of special effects, visual effects and animation content for display to the public; video, digital media and content production services, namely, video production, multimedia entertainment production 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 22, 2012 | 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 22, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 17, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 17, 2012 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2012 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Mar 21, 2012 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 19, 2012 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2012 | 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. |
| Sep 22, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Sep 21, 2011 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 16, 2011 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Sep 16, 2011 | 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. |
| Apr 2, 2011 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2011 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 29, 2011 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Mar 21, 2011 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 21, 2011 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 27, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 7, 2010 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 23, 2010 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 23, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 10, 2010 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 9, 2010 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 9, 2010 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 9, 2010 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 8, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 7, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 7, 2010 | 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. |
| Dec 7, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 4, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 4, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 9, 2009 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Sep 8, 2009 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Sep 4, 2009 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |