USPTO serial 75770409
SUPER QUEEN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CAPSHAW, DANIEL
- 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 SUPER QUEEN?
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.
Lisa M. Krizan
LISA M KRIZAN LMK PLC1423 PARK AVERICHMOND, VA 23220UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely the production of a continuing show and movies about superheroes distributed over television, cable, satellite, audio, and video media; multimedia entertainment software production services; entertainment services namely the production of theatrical plays; and audio recording and production; entertainment in the nature of live performances by a musical group | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 8, 2004 | 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 29, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 28, 2004 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 28, 2004 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 16, 2004 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 24, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 21, 2003 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 14, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| May 22, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| May 21, 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. |
| Jan 13, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 21, 2002 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 10, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| May 20, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 20, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 6, 2001 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 7, 2001 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 22, 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. |
| Feb 27, 2001 | 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. |
| Jan 26, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 15, 2000 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 6, 2000 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 20, 2000 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 3, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 31, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 15, 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. |
| Dec 7, 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. |
| Dec 1, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |