USPTO serial 78969006
MM
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DUBRAY, KATHERINE M
- 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 MM?
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.
Brian M. Dingman
BRIAN M DINGMAN MIRICK, O'CONNELL, DEMALLIE & LOUGEE, LL1700 W PARK DRWESTBOROUGH, MA 01581-3939UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Virtual reality or augmented reality based entertainment systems comprised of computer hardware and electronic video displays for use in augmented reality and virtual reality applications; computer hardware and software for displaying augmented reality and virtual reality imagery | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | Leasing of virtual reality or augmented reality based entertainment systems | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 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. |
| Mar 18, 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. |
| Oct 25, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 17, 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. |
| Apr 24, 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. |
| Apr 4, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 24, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 12, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 12, 2007 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 12, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 28, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 27, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 27, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Nov 30, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 14, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Sep 13, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |