USPTO serial 78435559
TV SLOTS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MICKLEBURGH, LINDA BOHANNON
- 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 TV SLOTS?
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.
Taylor M. Davenport
Taylor M. Davenport Walker Digital Management, LLC2 High Ridge ParkStamford, CT 06905UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | GAMING MACHINES AND GAMBLING MACHINES; SOFTWARE FOR OPERATING SUCH MACHINES; AND KITS FOR MODIFYING SUCH MACHINES AND SOFTWARE, SAID KITS COMPRISING REPLACEMENT SOFTWARE AND MODIFICATION INSTRUCTIONS ALL SOLD AS A UNIT | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 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. |
| Feb 23, 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. |
| Aug 20, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 1, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 1, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 22, 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. |
| Jan 25, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 18, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 18, 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. |
| Jan 11, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 2, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 13, 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 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. |
| Jul 23, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 23, 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. |
| Oct 31, 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. |
| Oct 11, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 14, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 12, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 29, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 15, 2006 | LIEC | LEGAL INSTRUMENT EXAMINER (LIE) - CORRECTION | — |
| Aug 15, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 8, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 11, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 30, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 30, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 30, 2006 | 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 30, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 28, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 29, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 29, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 3, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 25, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 25, 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. |
| Jan 25, 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. |
| Jan 25, 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. |
| Jan 18, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 23, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |