USPTO serial 86085743
GABSTR
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FALK, JONATHAN ROBERT
- 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 GABSTR?
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
Menlo Park, CA
Menlo Park, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Gregory T. Fettig
GREGORY T. FETTIG DUFT BORNSEN & FETTIG LLP1526 SPRUCE ST STE 302BOULDER, CO 80302-4261UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | Chat room services for social networking; Computer services, namely, providing on-line facilities for real-time interaction with other computer users concerning topics of education; Computer services, namely, providing on-line facilities for real-time interaction with other computer users concerning topics of general interest; Peer-to-peer network computer services, namely, electronic transmission of audio, video and other data and documents among computers; Providing chat lines utilising the internet; Providing internet chatrooms; Providing on-line chat rooms and electronic bulletin boards for transmission of messages among users in the field of general interest; Providing on-line chat rooms for social networking; Providing virtual chat rooms established via text messaging; Providing voice chat services; Virtual chat rooms established via text messaging | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2016 | 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. |
| Sep 26, 2016 | 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. |
| Mar 8, 2016 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2016 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 24, 2016 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Feb 24, 2016 | 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. |
| Jan 28, 2016 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2016 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 16, 2016 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 20, 2015 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 20, 2015 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Nov 20, 2015 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 20, 2015 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 28, 2015 | 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. |
| Sep 28, 2015 | 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. |
| Aug 24, 2015 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 24, 2015 | 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. |
| Dec 30, 2014 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2014 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2014 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 21, 2014 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 20, 2014 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 5, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 5, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 30, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 29, 2014 | NREV | NOTICE OF REVIVAL - E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 28, 2014 | 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 28, 2014 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 28, 2014 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 28, 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. |
| Aug 28, 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. |
| Jan 23, 2014 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2014 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2014 | 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. |
| Jan 23, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 16, 2013 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 15, 2013 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 11, 2013 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |