USPTO serial 78240814
SPURS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RUTLAND, BARBARA A
- 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 SPURS?
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.
DARREN S. RIMER
DARREN S. RIMER RIMER & MATHEWSON LLPONE EMBARCADERO CTR STE 500SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | (Based on Intent to Use) Pre-recorded video tapes and DVDs in the field of adult entertainment | ACTIVE | — |
| 016 | (Based on Use in Commerce) magazines featuring adult entertainment | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | (Based on Intent to Use) entertainment services, namely, providing a web site featuring adult entertainment | 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 Prowest Media Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by Prowest Media Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named SPURS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 20, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 8, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 8, 2007 | 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. |
| Aug 8, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 23, 2006 | ETOP | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE PROCESS - TERMINATED | — |
| Mar 7, 2006 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 23, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 16, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 9, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 2, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 24, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 24, 2005 | 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. |
| Oct 12, 2005 | GRML | CORRESPONDENCE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 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. |
| Sep 1, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 15, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 10, 2005 | 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 10, 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 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 19, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 23, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 13, 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. |
| Oct 30, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |