USPTO serial 75440788
THUMB BALL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DIXON, JENNIFER HAZARD
- 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 THUMB BALL?
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.
H KEITH MILLER
H KEITH MILLER HARNESS DICKEY & PIERCE PLCP O BOX 828BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48303UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | Throwing game comprising a ball and one or more hand-held ball throwing and receiving devices each having a controllable suction feature for securing the ball to and releasing the ball from the device(s) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 30, 2000 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 4, 2000 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Apr 17, 2000 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Feb 8, 2000 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Feb 7, 2000 | IUAA | USE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED | — |
| Feb 4, 2000 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Nov 8, 1999 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Oct 27, 1999 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 7, 1999 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Mar 4, 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. |
| Jan 29, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 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. |
| Jul 15, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |