USPTO serial 75702153
MAJOR LEAGUE LACROSSE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHOINIERE, MONIQUE
- 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 MAJOR LEAGUE LACROSSE?
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.
TERESA A. LEE
TERESA LEE PRYOR CASHMAN LLP410 PARK AVENEW YORK, NY 10022-4407UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer game programs; computer video games, namely, computer video game programs, software, and discs; video game cartridges; video game machines for use with televisions | ACTIVE | — |
| 028 | Sporting goods and toys, namely, action figures, balloons, bats, beach balls, board games, bobble head dolls, dolls, golf balls, golf club head covers, golf clubs, golf tees, handheld unit for playing video games, inflatable sports toys, jigsaw puzzles, kites, puppets, puzzles, stuffed animals, stuffed toys, teddy bears, toy banks, and yo-yos | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2009 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 2, 2009 | COAR | TEAS CHANGE OF OWNER ADDRESS RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 2, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 25, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 25, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 3, 2008 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jan 3, 2008 | 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 3, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 3, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 3, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 28, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 28, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 28, 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. |
| Oct 6, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 27, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 27, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 27, 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. |
| Jan 3, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 11, 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. |
| Sep 21, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 7, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jul 1, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 28, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 16, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 3, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 14, 2004 | 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 13, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Oct 22, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 19, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 25, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 26, 2003 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 12, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 17, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 7, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 7, 2003 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 7, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 7, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 10, 2002 | 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 8, 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. |
| Nov 27, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 31, 2001 | 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. |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Jul 29, 2000 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 27, 2000 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 27, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| 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 22, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 21, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |