USPTO serial 86889101
COMMAND CENTER FOR VIDEO GAMES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- HARDY LUDLOW, TARAH KIM
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - 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 COMMAND CENTER FOR VIDEO GAMES?
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.
Thomas J. Speiss, III
THOMAS J. SPEISS, III STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH, P.C.100 WILSHIRE BLVD., 4TH FLOORSANTA MONICA, CA 90401UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software, namely, game engine software for video game development and operation; Computer-gaming software; Downloadable computer game software via a global computer network and wireless devices; Downloadable computer programs featuring position-able game piece figures for use in the field of computer games; Interactive multimedia computer game programs; Interactive video game programs | ACTIVE | Jul 31, 2015 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 27, 2017 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Nov 27, 2017 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Nov 27, 2017 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 14, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 13, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 13, 2017 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| May 12, 2017 | GNFN | NOTIFICATION OF FINAL REFUSAL EMAILED | — |
| May 12, 2017 | 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. |
| May 12, 2017 | 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. |
| May 2, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 2, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 28, 2017 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 7, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 8, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 8, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 19, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 18, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 18, 2016 | 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 18, 2016 | 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. |
| May 18, 2016 | 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. |
| May 18, 2016 | 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. |
| May 11, 2016 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 2, 2016 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Jan 30, 2016 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |