USPTO serial 74595517
OK TOYS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SALEMI, DOMINICK
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 OK TOYS?
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.
Owner
Los Angeles, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
NORM D ST LANDAU
DRINKLER BIDDLE &REATH LLP1500 K ST NW STE 1100WASHINGTON, DC 20005-1209Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | toy vehicles, battery operated toy vehicles and toy animals, wind-toy vehicles and toy animals, toy airplanes, guns and rifles; toy robots; dolls and accessories | ACTIVE | Jul 1, 1985 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 1, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 1, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 3, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 3, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 25, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 22, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 1, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 20, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 3, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 15, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 8, 1996 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 3, 1996 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Jul 1, 1996 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 10, 1995 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |