USPTO serial 86184114
SPORTIQ
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARL III, FRED
- 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 SPORTIQ?
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
Helsinki, FI
Helsinki, FI
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Geza C. Ziegler
GEZA C. ZIEGLER ZIEGLER IP LAW GROUP, LLC.55 Greens Farms RoadWESTPORT, CT 06880-5736UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Radio frequency identification (RFID) tags used for positioning, and radio frequency identification tag readers; tracking devices, namely, radio frequency identification tags for use on sporting equipment, players and officials and radio frequency identification tag readers for data gathering; television transmitters and television receivers for displaying or broadcasting sports analytics and sporting activities;electronic devices, namely, global positioning systems; computers; mobile telephones; tablet computers; smart phones; radio frequency identification tags embedded in sporting equipment, namely, balls, pucks, sticks and rackets to track a movement of the sporting equipment during sporting activities, namely, practices and games | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 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. |
| Jul 11, 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. |
| Jan 12, 2016 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2016 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 9, 2015 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2015 | 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. |
| Dec 9, 2015 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 21, 2015 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2015 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 20, 2015 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 20, 2015 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 12, 2015 | EPPA | TEAS POST PUBLICATION AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 17, 2015 | INCD | ITU OFFICE ACTION ISSUED FOR DIVISIONAL REQUEST | — |
| Jul 15, 2015 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jun 9, 2015 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 9, 2015 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 9, 2015 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 9, 2015 | 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. |
| Dec 9, 2014 | 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. |
| Oct 14, 2014 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 14, 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. |
| Sep 24, 2014 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 9, 2014 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 9, 2014 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 26, 2014 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2014 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| Jul 28, 2014 | 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. |
| Jul 28, 2014 | 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. |
| Jul 3, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 2, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 2, 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. |
| May 13, 2014 | GPRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| May 13, 2014 | 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. |
| May 13, 2014 | 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. |
| May 9, 2014 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 15, 2014 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |