USPTO serial 75463415
USGAMES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MIZELLE HOWARD, DEZMONA JULYE
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 110 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 USGAMES?
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.
THOMAS J MOORE
THOMAS J MOORE BACON & LANE625 SLATERS LANE 4TH FLALEXANDRIA, VA 22314UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | PROVIDING INFORMATION OVER A GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORK FEATURING BOARD GAMES, CARD GAMES, STORIES, DIRECTORIES FOR BOARD GAMES, CARD GAMES, AND COLLECTIBLES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2012 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 27, 2012 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 12, 2012 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 12, 2012 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Sep 9, 2011 | RBFT | REPLY BRIEF FILED - CHECK TTAB FILES | — |
| Aug 16, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 16, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 12, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 10, 2011 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 22, 2011 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2011 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 21, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 22, 2011 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 8, 2011 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 8, 2011 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Feb 26, 2011 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 21, 2010 | RBFT | REPLY BRIEF FILED - CHECK TTAB FILES | — |
| Jun 29, 2010 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2010 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 29, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 29, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 14, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 30, 2010 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| May 20, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 10, 2005 | 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. |
| May 9, 2005 | 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. |
| May 9, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 1, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 16, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 24, 2001 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Mar 20, 2001 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Mar 2, 2001 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 19, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 19, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 17, 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 12, 2000 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 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. |
| Mar 10, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 10, 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. |
| Sep 3, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |