Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for ICONTROL OPENHOME PROGRAM, serial 85184018, as a dated PDF. One price, one document, delivered in about a minute.
INSTANT DELIVERY
Trademark Status Report
$7.99
The USPTO's own status record for this mark, on one dated page.
- Current status with a plain-English verdict
- Owner, classes, filing basis, and every key date
- The mark as it appears on the federal record
- Every prosecution event, filing to today
- Source-cited with the exact retrieval date
Built from the USPTO's TSDR record. Assignment chain of title and TTAB proceeding files sit in separate USPTO systems and are not included.
Preview
◆ TRADEMARKCHECKER.AITRADEMARK STATUS REPORT
ICONTROL OPENHOME PROGRAMSerial 85184018 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: iControl Networks, Inc.
Class 042 - Scientific & Technology Services
Class 045 - Legal & Personal Services
Filed Nov 23, 2010
The record shows that “ICONTROL OPENHOME PROGRAM” is a dead application that was abandoned on Feb 18 2013 because the applicant never filed a Statement of Use after the Notice of Allowance, and the owner listed is iControl Networks, Inc., a Delaware corporation. The filing covered scientific‑technology services (class 042) for developing voluntary standards and accreditation related to broadband home management, security, monitoring, automation, energy management and health care, and legal‑personal services (class 045) providing information and news about home security, monitoring and automation; a similar name used in those same technology‑standard or informational contexts would raise the closest record‑based concern. The record does not give the owner control over every possible use of the words “iControl,” “OpenHome,” or “Program.” This was a Principal Register filing, not a Supplemental Register entry, and the prosecution history shows only the usual office actions and a petition to revive before the final abandonment. No oppositions, cancellations or court actions appear in the supplied history. I'd treat this as a meaningful concern if you plan to offer comparable standards or informational services in the home‑technology space.
Full event history, owner details, and verdict inside.
The way I'd use it, honestly, is as the thing you attach when a bank, a marketplace, or a co-founder asks "are we clear on the name". It answers in one page.