USPTO serial 78242905
THE GROOVE MONSTER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EDWARDS, ALICIA COLLINS
- 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 THE GROOVE MONSTER?
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.
Jeffrey Kerwin
JEFFREY KERWIN LAW OFFICES OF JEFFREY KERWIN3911 HARRISON STOAKLAND, CA 94611UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment in the nature of live visual and audio performances, namely, live musical band, rock group, gymnastic, dance, and ballet performances; entertainment, namely, live music concerts; entertainment, namely, live performances by a musical band; entertainment services, namely, providing a web site featuring musical performances, musical videos, related film clips, photographs, and other multimedia materials | 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 DiPippo, Philip A.
- Other trademarks owned by DiPippo, Philip A.
- Other trademarks owned by Paolino, Keith J.
- Other trademarks owned by Paolino, Keith J.
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named THE GROOVE MONSTER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 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. |
| Nov 15, 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. |
| May 31, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 24, 2006 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| May 24, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 24, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| May 15, 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. |
| May 15, 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. |
| Mar 13, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2005 | 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 21, 2005 | 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. |
| Jun 1, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 4, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 28, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 22, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 22, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 6, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 2, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 2, 2004 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Nov 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 29, 2004 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 17, 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. |
| Sep 30, 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. |
| Sep 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |