USPTO serial 78376099
POWERED BY SPOTCELL TECHNOLOGY SPOTWAVE WIRELESS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SNAPP, TINA LOUISE
- 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 POWERED BY SPOTCELL TECHNOLOGY SPOTWAVE WIRELESS?
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.
Gregory J. Chinlund
Gregory J. Chinlund Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP233 South Wacker Drive6300 Sears TowerChicago, IL 60606Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Stationary and mobile wireless transceivers used to enhance signals for wireless subscribers | 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 Spotwave Wireless Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Spotwave Wireless Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by SPOTWAVE WIRELESS CANADA INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named POWERED BY SPOTCELL TECHNOLOGY SPOTWAVE WIRELESS
- Prosecution event ARAA explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 6, 2009 | 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 6, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 5, 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. |
| Dec 5, 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. |
| Jan 17, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 15, 2006 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| May 16, 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. |
| Feb 21, 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 1, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 6, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 31, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 29, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 16, 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. |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Jul 12, 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. |
| Jul 1, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 22, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 15, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 15, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 25, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 4, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 20, 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. |
| Sep 20, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 18, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 17, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |