USPTO serial 78674660
SHOWFINDER.CA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HAYES, GINA CLARK
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 SHOWFINDER.CA?
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
Ottawa, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Elisabeth A. Langworthy, David E. Weslow, Bradley E. Prendergast, Patricia B. Cunningham, John L. North, Peter G. Pappas, Daniel J. Warren, James H. Johnson, Jr.
ELISABETH A LANGWORTHY SUTHERLAND ASBILL & BRENNAN LLP1275 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2415UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software for assisting users in matching entertainment interests with media options and formats | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely, assisting users in matching entertainment interests with media options and formats | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Information services, namely, providing information in the field of entertainment; application service provider (ASP) services, namely, hosting computer software applications of others | 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 15, 2013 | 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. |
| Jan 15, 2013 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 25, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 22, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 18, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 18, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 27, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 27, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 20, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 22, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 9, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 19, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 19, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 10, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 25, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 10, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 26, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 21, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 4, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 4, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 14, 2008 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 24, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 10, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 23, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 23, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 2, 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. |
| Aug 1, 2006 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Aug 1, 2006 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 8, 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. |
| Feb 8, 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. |
| Feb 8, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 26, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |