USPTO serial 78331723
MOVIEME
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AYALA, LOURDES
- 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 MOVIEME?
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
Santa Monica, CA
Santa Monica, CA
Burbank, CA
Burbank, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Photographic kiosk which captures, delivers, and projects images onto a theatre screen, allowing moviegoers to photograph, and then view their image on a movie screen | 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 Davidson, Gary Joseph
- Other trademarks owned by Davidson, Gary Joseph
- Other trademarks owned by Gannon, Michael John
- Other trademarks owned by Gannon, Michael John
- Other trademarks owned by White, Geoffrey Charles
- Other trademarks owned by White, Geoffrey Charles
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named MOVIEME
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| Mar 14, 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. |
| Feb 22, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 31, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 15, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 7, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 7, 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. |
| Nov 7, 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. |
| Nov 7, 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. |
| Nov 4, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 17, 2005 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Mar 7, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 7, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 15, 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. |
| Feb 15, 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. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 13, 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 28, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 15, 2003 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |