USPTO serial 78779873
FLIRT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STEIN, JAMES W
- 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 FLIRT?
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
Los Angeles, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jacob C. Reinbolt
JACOB C. REINBOLT PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES & SAVITCH LLP530 B STREET, STE. 2100SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4469UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Communications by means of mobile phones; Communications services, namely, transmitting streamed sound and audio-visual recordings via the Internet; Communications via multinational telecommunication networks; Electronic exchange of data stored in databases accessible via telecommunication networks; Electronic message transmission; Electronic store-and-forward messaging; Instant messaging services; Text and numeric wireless digital messaging services; Transmission of database information via telecommunications networks; Transmission of information by electronic communications networks; Transmission of short messages; Virtual chatrooms established via text messaging; Web messaging; Wireless communications services, namely, transmission of graphics to mobile telephones; Wireless digital messaging services | ACTIVE | Feb 17, 1995 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 21, 2010 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 21, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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 21, 2010 | 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 21, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 7, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 2, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 31, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 27, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 26, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 9, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 26, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 20, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |