USPTO serial 78285545
SPIKE TV
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEIGLE, KATHERINE CONNOLLY
- 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 SPIKE TV?
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.
Selene Costello
LAVATUS V POWELL III VIACOM INTERNATIONAL INC1515 BROADWAY FL 34NEW YORK, NY 10036-8901UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | WIRELESS MOBILE PHONE TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES AND ALL TYPES OF MOBILE PHONE SERVICES; PROVIDING WIRELESS TRANSMISSION OF UPLOADING AND DOWNLOADING RING TONES, VOICE, MUSIC, MP3S, GRAPHICS, VIDEO IMAGES, INFORMATION, AND NEWS VIA A GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORK TO A WIRELESS MOBILE COMMUNICATION DEVICE; SENDING AND RECEIVING VOICE AND TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN WIRELESS MOBILE COMMUNICATION DEVICES; INTERNET SERVICES WHICH SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD TO INCLUDE COMMUNICATION SERVICES, NAMELY, TRANSMITTING STREAMED SOUND AND AUDIO-VISUAL RECORDINGS VIA THE INTERNET | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2009 | 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. |
| Sep 28, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 20, 2009 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 20, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 6, 2009 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 6, 2009 | 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 26, 2008 | 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 3, 2008 | 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. |
| May 14, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 27, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 24, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 17, 2008 | 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 25, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 18, 2007 | ZZZX | PREVIOUS ALLOWANCE COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Oct 5, 2007 | PBCR | WITHDRAWN FROM PUB - OG REVIEW QUERY | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 25, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 30, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 30, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 30, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 27, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 4, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 27, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 8, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 2, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 2, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 14, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 8, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 3, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 24, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2004 | EMRV | EMAIL RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 25, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 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 11, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |