USPTO serial 75802368
KIDS GOLF
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BORSUK, ESTHER
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 112 - 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 KIDS GOLF?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Frank A. Cona
FRANK A CONA HACKNEY MILLER, PAADMIRALTY OFFICE TWR TWO4400 PGA BLVD STE 505PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL 33410Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Educational and entertainment services, namely, sponsoring golf tournaments for children | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 24, 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. |
| Jun 24, 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. |
| Jan 18, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 26, 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. |
| Oct 25, 2004 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Oct 20, 2004 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 27, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 17, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 29, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 20, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 25, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 20, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 16, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 6, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 13, 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. |
| Jan 7, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 5, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |