USPTO serial 78894426
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
Santa Monica, CA
Santa Monica, CA
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Peter M. Eichler, Esq.
Peter M. Eichler, Esq. Jennings, Strouss & Salmon P.L.C.201 E. Washington Street, 11th FloorThe Collier CenterPhoenix, AZ 85004-2385| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Prerecorded audio and video recordings featuring motion pictures; games apparatus, namely, video game machines adapted or intended for use with a television, monitor or some other form of display apparatus which is separate from the games apparatus; video and computer game machines, namely standalone video craps game machines; computer game equipment containing memory devices namely discs; game apparatus attached to a television but having its own display, namely video game machines for use with television; interactive computer game software downloaded from a global computer network; slot machines; eyeglasses and sunglasses | ACTIVE | — |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2009 | 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 13, 2009 | 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 10, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 10, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Sep 10, 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. |
| Sep 5, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 11, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 11, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 11, 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. |
| Sep 11, 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. |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| May 30, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 12, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 11, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 11, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 11, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 27, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 27, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 26, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 9, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 9, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 16, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 16, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 19, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Oct 19, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Oct 5, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 3, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jun 2, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |