USPTO serial 78501783
PROMOWIDE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MAYERSCHOFF, GLENN
- 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 PROMOWIDE?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Audio-video receivers; audiovisual teaching apparatus namely audiovisual receivers and projectors; Sound recording apparatus, namely, audio tape recorders; audio-video disc players; Liquid crystal display video disc players and compact disc players; digital video disc players; wireless headphones; video graphic cards; audio and video recording machines; video capture cards | 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 5, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 2, 2007 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Nov 2, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Jul 30, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 30, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 21, 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. |
| May 21, 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. |
| Oct 23, 2006 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 23, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 23, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 18, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 11, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Sep 5, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 5, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 5, 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. |
| Sep 5, 2006 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 3, 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. |
| Jul 3, 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. |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Nov 30, 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. |
| Nov 30, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 25, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 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. |
| May 24, 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. |
| May 24, 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. |
| May 19, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 26, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |