USPTO serial 75411779
LUNKER BASS FISHIN'
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TAYLOR, CRAIG
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 LUNKER BASS FISHIN'?
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.
ALFRED N. GOODMAN
ALFRED N GOODMAN ROYLANCE ABRAMS BERDO & GOODMAN LLP1300 19TH ST N WWASHINGTON, DC 20036UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | HAND HELD UNIT FOR PLAYING ELECTRONIC 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 18, 2002 | PRRD | PETITION RECONSIDERATION REQUEST DENIED | — |
| May 30, 2002 | PRRR | PETITION RECONSIDERATION REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 4, 2002 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Mar 6, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 14, 2000 | 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. |
| Apr 14, 2000 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 1999 | 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. |
| Sep 16, 1999 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 16, 1999 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Feb 2, 1999 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL 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. |
| Dec 23, 1998 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 25, 1998 | 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. |
| Jun 17, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 1, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 20, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |