USPTO serial 78753025
MIVIEWTV
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GARTNER, JOHN M
- 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 MIVIEWTV?
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.
K BRADFORD ADOLPHSON
K BRADFORD ADOLPHSON WARE FRESSOLA CAN DER SLUYS LLP755 MAIN ST P O BOX 224BRADFOR GREEN BUILDING FICEMONROE, CT 06468Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | TELEVISION TRANSMISSION SERVICES PROVIDED VIA A TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK IN ORDER TO FOLLOW A USER'S LOCATION AND BE VIEWABLE AND ACCESSIBLE ON A VARIETY OF END USER DEVICES SUCH AS PDA, PC, OR AN ALTERNATIVE TV SET LOCATION | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Lucent Technologies, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Lucent Technologies, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 038
- Similar marks named MIVIEWTV
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 19, 2010 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Apr 19, 2010 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 21, 2009 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 18, 2009 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Mar 18, 2009 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 18, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 16, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Mar 16, 2009 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Sep 12, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 12, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2008 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Apr 17, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 24, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 20, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 4, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 6, 2008 | PGEX | PETITION GRANTED - EXTENSION REQUEST FILED | — |
| Feb 5, 2008 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Jan 30, 2008 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 30, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 3, 2008 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Dec 7, 2007 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 20, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2007 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Dec 26, 2006 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Dec 6, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 19, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 19, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 2, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 2, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 1, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 1, 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. |
| Jul 11, 2006 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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 10, 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 19, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 13, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 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. |
| May 30, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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 29, 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. |
| May 19, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 17, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |