USPTO serial 75590870
RIBBIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GOLDEN, JAMES B
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 RIBBIT?
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.
SABRINA C STAVISH
COLLEEN F GOSS FAY, SHARPE, FAGAN, MINNICH & MCKEE7TH FL1100 SUPERIOR AVECLEVELAND, OH 44122Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | BEACH BALLS; SAND PITS, NAMELY, SAND BOXES; INFLATABLE WATER TOYS; INFLATABLE WATER MATTRESSES; INFLATABLE SWIMMING AIDS, NAMELY, ARM FLOATS, SWIM RINGS, VESTS, AND HAND-HELD FLOATS; SWIMMING FLIPPERS; SWIMMING MASKS; AND INFLATABLE AND NON-INFLATABLE PLAY SWIMMING AND WADDING POOLS | 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 30, 2007 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Mar 30, 2007 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Aug 11, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Feb 4, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 12, 2006 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jul 12, 2005 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Apr 19, 2005 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Mar 30, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 21, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 18, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 12, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 10, 2005 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 17, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 10, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 10, 2004 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| May 24, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 10, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 10, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Sep 25, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2002 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 15, 2002 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 19, 2002 | 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. |
| Mar 27, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 27, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 23, 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. |
| Jun 15, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |