Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for ANDROID POS, serial 86308666, 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
ANDROID POSSerial 86308666 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: EBN TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
Class 009 - Electrical & Scientific Apparatus
Filed Jun 13, 2014
The record shows that “ANDROID POS” is an abandoned application – the USPTO marked it dead after the applicant failed to respond to an Office action, with the abandonment notice dated April 24 2015, and the owner listed as EBN Technology Corporation, a Taiwan corporation. The filing covered only Class 009 goods, specifically point‑of‑sale hardware and related devices such as cash registers, tablet POS systems, scanners, printers, card and NFC readers, RFID readers, iBeacon units, touch panels, USB card readers and associated software for managing inventory, accounting, employee and security functions. Because the protection is limited to those electronic‑commerce devices, a similar name used for unrelated products or services would be farther from the scope shown here, and the record does not give the owner control over every use of the words “Android” or “POS.” The prosecution history contains only the non‑final action and the abandonment notice, and no oppositions, cancellations or court actions appear, so the supplied history shows no visible enforcement activity. I'd treat this as a meaningful concern if you plan to brand point‑of‑sale hardware with a similar name, since the abandoned filing still signals that the USPTO found a conflict in that product area.
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.