USPTO serial 78598935
WHERE GREAT TELEVISION IS BORN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRODY, DANIEL S
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - SENIOR ATTORNEY
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with WHERE GREAT TELEVISION IS BORN?
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.
Angela Washelesky
Debra L. Hutchings REED SMITH LLP10 S. Wacker Dr.Chicago, IL 60606-7507UNITED STATESGoods and services
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.
- Other trademarks owned by BANFF TELEVISION FESTIVAL FOUNDATION
- Other trademarks owned by Achilles Media Ltd.
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Other trademarks in Class 021
- Other trademarks in Class 022
- Similar marks named WHERE GREAT TELEVISION IS BORN
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 6, 2009 | 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 6, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 3, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 29, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 29, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 29, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 28, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 28, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 28, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 29, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 29, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 29, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 23, 2007 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 23, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 23, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 23, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 23, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 7, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 19, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 6, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 6, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 5, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 5, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| May 5, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 10, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 10, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 28, 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. |
| Oct 28, 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. |
| Oct 24, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 6, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |