USPTO serial 76420336
TOP SPIN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MACIOL II, EUGENE VALENTINE-JO
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 103 - 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 TOP SPIN?
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
Mid Glamorgan CF31 3UX, GB
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark Lebow, Esquire
Mark Lebow YOUNG & THOMPSON209 Madison StreetSuite 500Alexandria, VA 22314Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | casino gaming machines, casino slot machines and parts and fittings therefor | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 16, 2008 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Feb 3, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 23, 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. |
| Jan 23, 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. |
| May 31, 2006 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| May 31, 2006 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| May 30, 2006 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | — |
| May 16, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 27, 2005 | CRML | CORRESPONDENCE MAILED | — |
| Oct 27, 2005 | CNRT | 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. |
| Oct 20, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Apr 11, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 4, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 1, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 15, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 18, 2004 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 14, 2004 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 12, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 23, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 23, 2003 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 15, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 15, 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. |
| Sep 25, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 23, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |