USPTO serial 76307689
MAXIMUM WIN, MINIMUM LOSS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AYALA, LOURDES
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - 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 MAXIMUM WIN, MINIMUM LOSS?
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
Las Vegas, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
PHILIP J ANDERSON
Robert Ryan Morishita Morishita Law Firm4955 S. Durango Drive, Suite 153Las Vegas, NV 89148UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | Wagering services | ACTIVE | Jul 27, 2004 |
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 24, 2014 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 23, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 30, 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. |
| Apr 29, 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. |
| Feb 11, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 24, 2004 | CNRT | SU - 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. |
| Sep 20, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 15, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 13, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 28, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 28, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 9, 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. |
| Feb 11, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 29, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 29, 2003 | 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. |
| May 6, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 16, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Feb 27, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 24, 2003 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 23, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 17, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 15, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 8, 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. |
| Dec 3, 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. |
| Nov 27, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |