USPTO serial 76206220
COTTON CANDY CLOUD CASTLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ALT, JILL
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 COTTON CANDY CLOUD CASTLE?
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.
Marcia G. Gentner
MARCIA G GENTNER JACOBSON HOLMAN PLLC400 7TH ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | TOYS, NAMELY, DOLLS, DOLLHOUSES, DOLL CASES, DOLL FURNITURE, ACTION FIGURES AND CASES AND ACCESSORIES THEREFOR, PLUSH TOYS, BATH TOYS, PUPPETS, CHILDREN MULTIPLE ACTIVITY TOYS, RIDE-ON TOYS, MUSICAL TOYS, TOY BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION BLOCKS, CHILDREN'S WIRE CONSTRUCTION AND ART ACTIVITY TOYS, CONSTRUCTION TOYS, GAME TABLES, CHILDREN'S ACTIVITY TABLES CONTAINING MANIPULATIVE TOYS WHICH CONVERT TO EASELS, CUBE-TYPE, JIGSAW, AND MANIPULATIVE PUZZLES, DOLL COSTUMES, COSTUME MASKS, BATTERY-POWERED COMPUTER GAME WITH LCD SCREEN WHICH FEATURES ANIMATION AND SOUND EFFECTS, BOARD GAMES, ELECTRONIC EDUCATIONAL GAME MACHINES FOR CHILDREN, AND MANIPULATIVE GAMES | 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 15, 2008 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Jan 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 17, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 17, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 17, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 20, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 10, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 10, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 17, 2006 | 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. |
| Dec 6, 2005 | OP.T | OPPOSITION TERMINATED NO. 999999 | — |
| Aug 29, 2005 | OP.D | OPPOSITION DISMISSED NO. 999999 | — |
| Apr 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 11, 2003 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 3, 2002 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 24, 2002 | OP.I | OPPOSITION INSTITUTED NO. 999999 | — |
| May 2, 2002 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 26, 2002 | 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 6, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Sep 19, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 11, 2001 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 2001 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Jun 26, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 16, 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. |
| Apr 27, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |