USPTO serial 85087392
END-TO-ENDLESS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SEVERSON, KAREN
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with END-TO-ENDLESS?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Adrienne L. White
ADRIENNE L. WHITE WRB-IP LLPPO BOX 476WADSWORTH, OH 44282-0476UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer hardware and software, software platforms, telecommunications and data networking software and hardware for deployment of Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), Digital Television (DTV), High Definition Television (HDTV), Video on Demand (VOD), Mobile Television, and 3D Television, across full service wired or wireless broadband networks, for home automation of television, for television content control, and for television advertising; computer hardware and software for encoding and decoding television signals, for diagnostics and monitoring of television deployment systems and components; and parts and fittings for all of the foregoing | ACTIVE | — |
| 038 | Providing Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), Digital Television (DTV), High Definition Television (HDTV), Video on Demand (VOD), Mobile Television, and 3D Television broadcasting and transmission services to both fixed and mobile devices; Telecommunication consultation in the nature of technical consulting in the fields of Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), Digital Television (DTV), High Definition Television (HDTV), Video on Demand (VOD), Mobile Television, and 3D Television, and audio, text and visual data transmission and communication associated therewith; Providing technical analysis and consultation in the fields of Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), Digital Television (DTV), High Definition Television (HDTV), Video on Demand (VOD), Mobile Television, and 3D Television, to others | ACTIVE | — |
| 042 | Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), Digital Television (DTV), High Definition Television (HDTV), Video on Demand (VOD), Mobile Television, and 3D Television related services, namely, computer software design, maintenance, consultancy, rental and programming, computer hardware rental and consultancy, and computer system analysis | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 29, 2014 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2014 | 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. |
| Oct 1, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 1, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 1, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 30, 2013 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 27, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 26, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 26, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 21, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 11, 2012 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 2012 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 2012 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 27, 2012 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 26, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 26, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 22, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 22, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 14, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 27, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 14, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 14, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 14, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| May 13, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 12, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| May 12, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 11, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 11, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 11, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 2, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 22, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jul 22, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |