USPTO serial 78886238
CITYCENTER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BRADLEY, EVELYN
- 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 CITYCENTER?
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.
Michael J. McCue, Linda M. Norcross; W. West Allen; John L. Krieger
MICHAEL J. MCCUE LEWIS AND ROCA LLP3993 HOWARD HUGHES PKWY STE 600LAS VEGAS, NV 89169UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Retail store services featuring a wide variety of consumer goods of others; Providing facilities for business meetings; art galleries; retail store services featuring artworks; customer incentive award program, namely, a casino customer loyalty program that provides casino benefits to reward repeat customers, for commercial, promotional and advertising purposes | 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 PROJECT CC, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by PROJECT CC, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by CITYCENTER LAND, LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Similar marks named CITYCENTER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 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 26, 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. |
| Jul 22, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jul 20, 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. |
| Jan 12, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 9, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jan 9, 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. |
| Nov 26, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 17, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Sep 12, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Sep 12, 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. |
| Mar 14, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 18, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 18, 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. |
| Feb 6, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Oct 25, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 25, 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. |
| Jul 3, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 13, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 30, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 30, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 11, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 9, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 9, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 9, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 27, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 26, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 26, 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. |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Oct 18, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 25, 2006 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| May 24, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |