USPTO serial 85360592
VIDEO MONET
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- WEIGLE, KATHERINE CONNOLLY
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 VIDEO MONET?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | Temporary use of non-downloadable computer software for controlling the operation of audio and video devices, for interconnecting, integrating, securing, managing, monitoring, and operating video conferencing systems, for enabling multi-location video conferencing, and for enabling users to participate in web-based meetings; video conferencing planning, design, and implementation services, namely, planning, design, and implementation of software for video conferencing; technical support services for computer networks and video conferencing solutions, namely, diagnosing computer hardware and software problems; computer services, namely, network and video conferencing solution management in the nature of troubleshooting systems or software problems and monitoring services, namely, troubleshooting of computer software problems, monitoring of network systems, remote computer network technical monitoring and software maintenance services, monitoring of computer systems of others for technical purposes and providing back-up computer programs and facilities, computer monitoring service which tracks application software performances, performs periodic maintenance, and provides reports and alerts concerning such performance | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 2013 | 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. |
| Dec 23, 2013 | 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 30, 2013 | WOAG | WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY GRANTED | — |
| Sep 30, 2013 | WOAR | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 26, 2013 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2013 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 25, 2013 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 25, 2013 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 19, 2013 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| May 22, 2013 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 22, 2013 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| May 22, 2013 | 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. |
| May 22, 2013 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 6, 2012 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 5, 2012 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 4, 2012 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 4, 2012 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 26, 2012 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 21, 2012 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2012 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 21, 2012 | 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. |
| Nov 21, 2012 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| May 22, 2012 | NOAM | NOA E-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. |
| Mar 27, 2012 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 27, 2012 | 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. |
| Mar 7, 2012 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 17, 2012 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 17, 2012 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Feb 2, 2012 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 1, 2012 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 1, 2012 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 1, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2011 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2011 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2011 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 8, 2011 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jul 4, 2011 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |