USPTO serial 75754482
EZ PLAY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SWAIN, MICHELE LYNN
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 116 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with EZ PLAY?
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
Reno, NV
Reno, NV
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Marc D. Foodman
AUDREY P DAMONTE ESQ IGT9295 PROTOTYPE DRRENO, NV 89511UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely, conducting games of chance | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 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. |
| Jan 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. |
| Mar 23, 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. |
| Feb 18, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 10, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 4, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2004 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 11, 2003 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 9, 2003 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jul 8, 2003 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 7, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 7, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jan 7, 2003 | 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 1, 2002 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 1, 2002 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jul 1, 2002 | 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. |
| Mar 15, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 30, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 9, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2001 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 9, 2001 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 9, 2001 | 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 17, 2000 | 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 15, 2000 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 17, 2000 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 14, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 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. |
| Dec 27, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 19, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |