USPTO serial 78483148
LIVE-FI
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STRASER, RICHARD
- 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 LIVE-FI?
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 (Applicant is an attorney)
AMY R GURVEY315 HIGHLAND AVEUPPER MONTCLAIR, NJ 07043UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Live event and content distribution, transmission, packaging, production and recording services including, without limitation, for live content distributed over wired and wireless networks | 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 16, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Jan 30, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 29, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 29, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 28, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 26, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 26, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 13, 2007 | 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 13, 2007 | 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 13, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 5, 2007 | 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 5, 2007 | 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 14, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 13, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 11, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 7, 2006 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Dec 7, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 30, 2006 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Oct 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 25, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 25, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 25, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 14, 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. |
| Sep 14, 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. |
| Feb 16, 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. |
| Feb 16, 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. |
| Jan 26, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 25, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 25, 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. |
| Jan 25, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jan 25, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 28, 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. |
| Nov 28, 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. |
| Apr 26, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 26, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Apr 13, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |