USPTO serial 78450008
DISC-O-TECH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KIM, YONG OH
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 DISC-O-TECH?
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
Upper Montclair, NJ
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Amy R. Gurvey, Esq. (Applicant))
AMY R GURVEY, ESQ (APPLICANT)) AMY R GURVEY315 HIGHLAND AVEUPPER MONTCLAIR, NJ 07043-1026UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment, Music, Sports, Educational Disc (Phonograph Record, CD, DVD and other versions of 'discs' as may now be known or hereafter devised) Technology for the production, transmission, distribution, sale and retrieval including authenticated retrieval of live event content recordings whether embodied in a fixed media of expression or intangible digital electronic format or other format as may now be known or hereafter devised including but not limited to at the venue/location where the live event takes place, at other worldwide location-based kiosks/terminals (at the venue or in retail stores, e;g;), and at other terminals including without limitation home computers; the operating systems used for the production, purchase, tracking and accounting of said recordings (on and off site by audience members and non-attendees alike) as may be integrated with ticketing systems, tournament entrance fees or placed bet information, authentication systems, editing technology; at any public venue, e;g;, nightclub, restaurant, eatery, coffee house, hotel, a chain of any of the foregoing, airports, gambling casinos, etc;, that will incorporate or install technology capable of at least any one producing, balancing, editing, distributing, selling and or retrieving live event content recordings (in any form and by any method by which they may be produced) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 2007 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Jan 8, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Nov 14, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 14, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 21, 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. |
| Aug 19, 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. |
| Jan 10, 2006 | 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 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 16, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 16, 2005 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 17, 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. |
| Oct 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. |
| Mar 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. |
| Mar 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. |
| Feb 16, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 21, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |