USPTO serial 76176568
IGAME
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- THOMPKINS, TRICIA
- 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 IGAME?
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.
Mikolean Morgan Longacre
MR MATTHEW F JOHNSTON LINIAK, BERENATO & WHITE LLC6550 ROCK SPRING DR STE 240BETHESDA, MD 20817UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | ELECTRONIC VIDEO GAME MACHINES FOR USE WITH TELEVISIONS AND RELATED ACCESSORIES NOT USED FOR GAMES OF CHANCE SOLD AS A UNIT THEREWITH | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 24, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 23, 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. |
| Jan 8, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 22, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 16, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 23, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 30, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 16, 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. |
| Jul 17, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 26, 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. |
| Feb 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 19, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| May 31, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |