USPTO serial 75861943
CREEPY CRAWLERS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KOVALSKY, LAURA G
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
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 CREEPY CRAWLERS?
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
Plainview, NY
Plainview, NY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
LARRY MILLER
LARRY MILLER FEDER,KASZOVITZ, ISAACSON, WEBER, SKALA750 LEXINGTON AVE 23RD FLNEW YORK, NY 10022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | TOYS FOR MAKING FOOD, NAMELY, TOY OVENS, TOY COOKING MOLDS AND MOLDING TRAY HANDLERS USED WITH TOY OVENS, TOY SPOONS AND PICKS, TOY COOLING TRAYS; TOY FOOD MOLDING KITS AND ACCESSORIES THEREFOR, NAMELY, MOLDS, MOLDING TRAY HANDLERS, SPOONS AND PICKS, COOLING TRAYS AND MIXTURES FOR MAKING CANDY AND CONFECTIONS AND THE LIKE | ACTIVE | Jun 27, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 18, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 17, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 21, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 26, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 13, 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 3, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 29, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jan 20, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 15, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 11, 2003 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2003 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 10, 2003 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Jun 10, 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. |
| Feb 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 6, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 11, 2002 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Dec 11, 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. |
| Jun 28, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 10, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2001 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 11, 2001 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 12, 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. |
| Mar 20, 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. |
| Mar 7, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 28, 2000 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Dec 22, 2000 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| May 11, 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. |
| May 9, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |