USPTO serial 78682932
VEVEO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HOFFMAN, DAVID AARON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 VEVEO?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Michael J. Bevilacqua, Esquire
MICHAEL J BEVILACQUA ESQ WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE & DORR LL60 STATE ST STE 25BOSTON, MA 02109-1816UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware and computer software for use by telecommunications service providers and telecommunications carriers in the exchange, delivery, distribution and management of video and multimedia information over cable, satellite, broadcast and broadband IP 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 7, 2007 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jun 7, 2007 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | GECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jun 15, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 2, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 2, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Sep 20, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 6, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |