USPTO serial 78889444
CITY SLAM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAVACHE, ROBERT JAMES
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 CITY SLAM?
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.
Nerissa Coyle McGinn
Nerissa Coyle McGinn Loeb & Loeb LLP321 North Clark Street, Suite 2300Chicago, IL 60610UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Pre-recorded videotapes and DVDs featuring sports entertainment | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 29, 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 29, 2008 | 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. |
| May 21, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 21, 2008 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 16, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 16, 2008 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| May 16, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 27, 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. |
| Sep 4, 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. |
| Aug 15, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 26, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 26, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 10, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 10, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| May 10, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| May 10, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| May 8, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 24, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 23, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 23, 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 24, 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 24, 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 24, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 30, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |