USPTO serial 78384756
IJAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ALTREE, NICHOLAS
- 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 IJAM?
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
Beverly Hills, CA
SEATTLE, WA
San Francisco, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Robyn S. Lederman
Robyn S. Lederman Cantor Colburn LLP201 W. Big Beaver Rd.Suite 1101Troy, MI 48084Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely, arranging and conducting interactive musical contests; providing reviews and ratings of musicians and music; providing prerecorded music and videos via the Internet; providing commentary and information about musical artists, musical technology, musicians, music and entertainment, including musical event scheduling information; providing radio musical programming | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 27, 2010 | 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 27, 2010 | 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 14, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2010 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| May 10, 2010 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| May 10, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 30, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 30, 2010 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 22, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 20, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Nov 20, 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. |
| Jun 15, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 15, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| May 27, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 27, 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. |
| Nov 17, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 17, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 17, 2008 | 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. |
| May 22, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 16, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 16, 2008 | 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 27, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 4, 2007 | 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. |
| Aug 15, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 30, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 24, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 15, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 15, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 15, 2007 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 11, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Feb 21, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 21, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jan 23, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 20, 2006 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | 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. |
| Jul 20, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 27, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 5, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 5, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Dec 2, 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. |
| Jun 3, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 13, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 13, 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. |
| May 10, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 10, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 4, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 18, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 18, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 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. |
| Oct 13, 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 27, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |