USPTO serial 78058829
CAMJAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ALT, JILL
- 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 CAMJAM?
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.
JOHN C. BAUM,
JOHN C BAUM TOWNSEND & TOWNSEND & CREW LLPTWO EMBARCADERO CTR 8TH FLSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111-3834UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Video recording disruption equipment, namely, image projection, image analysis, and authoring-software for use in anti-piracy of motion pictures, and computer software for use in the disruption of video recording | ACTIVE | — |
| 038 | Video recording disruption services, namely electronic transmission of video recording disruption signals for use in anti-piracy of motion pictures | 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 Cinea. LLC
- Other trademarks owned by CINEA, INC.
- Other trademarks owned by CINEA, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 038
- Similar marks named CAMJAM
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 19, 2006 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 19, 2006 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Apr 19, 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. |
| Oct 14, 2005 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | 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 18, 2005 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 18, 2005 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Apr 18, 2005 | 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 18, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 11, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 1, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 21, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 28, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 16, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 24, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 21, 2003 | 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 29, 2003 | 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 9, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 30, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 6, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 9, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Feb 24, 2003 | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2003 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Feb 5, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 5, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 22, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 23, 2002 | 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. |
| Feb 1, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 30, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 2001 | 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. |
| Jul 20, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |