USPTO serial 78926648
MATROSKA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AIKENS, RONALD E
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 MATROSKA?
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
Lanoka Harbor, NJ
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
RICHARD A CATALINA JR
RICHAARD A CATALINA JR CATALINA & ASSOCIATES2355 STATE HIGHWAY 33ROBINSVILLE, NJ 08691UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware; Computer software for storing, downloading, transferring audio, video, and other multimedia transmissions | ACTIVE | Dec 18, 2002 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 14, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Oct 30, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 30, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 15, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 12, 2007 | 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. |
| Jul 11, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 9, 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. |
| Dec 9, 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. |
| Dec 9, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 14, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |