USPTO serial 78166263
USDTV
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FAIRBANKS, RONALD L
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with USDTV?
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.
Brent T. Winder
BRENT T WINDER JONES WALDO HOLBROOK & MCDONOUGH170 S MAIN ST STE 1500SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84101-1644UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | television transmission services of television programming,television programming using conditional access, subscription video-on-demand, video-on-demand, digital broadcasting of digital television programming, terrestrial television broadcasting featuring over-the-air digital television broadcasting technology | ACTIVE | Dec 12, 2003 |
| 042 | consulting and design services in the field of wireless broadcasting,namely, consulting with broadcasters in the design and implementation of hardware and software for transmitting,receiving, storing, securing, converting, carrying, and processing digital electronic signals for subsequent display on a television set;and aggregating and integrating of audiovisual, interactive, and multicast content for subsequent display on a television set | ACTIVE | Dec 12, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 7, 2006 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jul 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 20, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 20, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 5, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Oct 29, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Sep 30, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 30, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 22, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Aug 19, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 19, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 28, 2005 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Apr 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 4, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 22, 2005 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | GNRU | DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2005 | AAUD | AMENDMENT OF ALLEGED USE DISAPPROVED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Nov 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 28, 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. |
| May 5, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 29, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 26, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 26, 2004 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 11, 2003 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 23, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 23, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 30, 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. |
| Apr 21, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 19, 2003 | 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 12, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |