USPTO serial 85091496
FIREFLY VIDEO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 601
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAMOTHE, LESLEY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 FIREFLY VIDEO?
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.
Lee Hagelshaw
LEE HAGELSHAW TECH LAW1728 OCEAN AVE STE 322SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94112-1737UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Advertising and marketing services, namely promoting the goods and services of others by delivering targeted video, graphic and textual advertising for viewing on selected websites; providing a website for the management of online advertising campaigns for others; dissemination of advertising for others via the Internet and other means of communication | ACTIVE | May 9, 2010 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 31, 2013 | MAB1 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - EXPRESS ABANDONMENT | — |
| Jan 31, 2013 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Jan 30, 2013 | EXAR | TEAS EXPRESS ABANDONMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 8, 2012 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Oct 8, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 8, 2012 | 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. |
| Sep 10, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 10, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 2012 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 1, 2012 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 18, 2012 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 18, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 18, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 1, 2011 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 1, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 29, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 29, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 30, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 30, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 30, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 23, 2010 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Aug 23, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 23, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 23, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 28, 2010 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2010 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jul 27, 2010 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |