USPTO serial 76416392
MUDDPIES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RUTLAND, BARBARA A
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 MUDDPIES?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark B. Eisen
MARK B EISEN DIMOCK STRATTON CLARIZIO LLP20 QUEEN ST W STE 3202BOX 102TORONTO, ON M5H 3R3Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | parlour games and board 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 5, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 3, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 26, 2006 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 18, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 8, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 1, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 16, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 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. |
| Dec 13, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |