USPTO serial 78149461
OUTERNET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HARDY LUDLOW, TARAH KIM
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 OUTERNET?
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.
BRIAN J WINTERFELDT
BRIAN J WINTERFELDT MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY ET AL701 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Electronic transmission of data, messages and documents in connection with an interactive website for children; providing on-line chat rooms for transmission of messages among computer users concerning topics of interest for children in the nature of interactive games, stories, and adventures | 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 11, 2005 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Oct 10, 2005 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | LOAP | LETTER OF ABANDONMENT PROCESSED | — |
| Sep 26, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 8, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Mar 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Mar 23, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 15, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 9, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 9, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 18, 2005 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 18, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 11, 2004 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Sep 11, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 2, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 14, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | 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 10, 2004 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 28, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2004 | 44DD | SEC. 44(D) CLAIM DELETED | — |
| May 28, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| May 28, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2004 | 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. |
| May 28, 2004 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 21, 2004 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 8, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 24, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 29, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 27, 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. |
| Feb 19, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |