USPTO serial 77967395
CLOUDTV
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EULIN, INGRID C
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 CLOUDTV?
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.
Lisa M. Tittemore
LISA M TITTEMORE SUNSTEIN KANN MURPHY & TIMBERS LLP125 SUMMER STREETBOSTON, MA 02110-1618UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Software for developing and publishing applications for viewing, displaying, selecting, browsing, customizing, organizing, searching and navigating audiovisual and multimedia content on a television, gaming console, mobile device or other network-connected display; Computer e-commerce software to allow users to perform electronic business transactions via a video-on-demand service | ACTIVE | Dec 20, 2011 |
| 038 | Broadcasting of television programs and providing telecommunication connectivity services for transfer of images, messages, audio, visual, audiovisual, and multimedia works for viewing on a television, gaming console, mobile device or other network-connected display via a video-on-demand service via network-based media processing software | ACTIVE | Apr 28, 2009 |
| 041 | Provision of non-downloadable television and other audiovisual and multimedia content via a video-on-demand service via network-based media processing software | ACTIVE | Apr 28, 2009 |
| 042 | Providing temporary use of online non-downloadable network-based media processing software for viewing, displaying, selecting, browsing, customizing, organizing, searching and navigating audiovisual and multimedia content on a television, gaming console, mobile device or other network-connected display; providing technical support consulting services regarding troubleshooting of network-based media processing software; product development consultation related to the design, development and implementation of network-based media processing services and software; providing temporary use of online non-downloadable network based media processing software for facilitation of purchases for viewing, displaying, selecting, browsing, customizing, organizing, searching and navigating audiovisual and multimedia content displayed on a television, gaming console, mobile device, or other network-connected display | ACTIVE | Apr 28, 2009 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 24, 2014 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 23, 2014 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 23, 2014 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jul 9, 2014 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jan 12, 2013 | RBFT | REPLY BRIEF FILED - CHECK TTAB FILES | — |
| Dec 20, 2012 | GNSN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2012 | GNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2012 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 28, 2012 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 23, 2012 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 7, 2012 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Aug 28, 2012 | EWAF | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED-FIRM RETAINS | — |
| Aug 7, 2012 | AAUA | NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF AMENDMENT TO ALLEGE USE E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2012 | GNS1 | NOTIFICATION OF SUBSEQUENT FINAL EMAILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2012 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2012 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 6, 2012 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 12, 2012 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 11, 2012 | 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. |
| Jan 11, 2012 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Jan 11, 2012 | 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. |
| Jan 11, 2012 | 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 15, 2011 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 15, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 7, 2011 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 2011 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Jun 6, 2011 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2011 | 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. |
| May 18, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 18, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 12, 2011 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| May 12, 2011 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| May 12, 2011 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| May 12, 2011 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Nov 15, 2010 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Nov 15, 2010 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Nov 15, 2010 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 21, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 21, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Jun 24, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Jun 24, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 24, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 24, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 30, 2010 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Mar 29, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Mar 27, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |