USPTO serial 76532327
16 BALL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GRIFFIN, JAMES
- 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 16 BALL?
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
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | BILLIARD BALLS, BILLIARD GAME PLAYING EQUIPMENT, BILLIARD TRIANGLES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 21, 2005 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jul 21, 2005 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 6, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 19, 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. |
| Nov 19, 2004 | GAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 19, 2004 | NAUD | REPORT UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 19, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 29, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 29, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 3, 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. |
| Jan 30, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 6, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 19, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 19, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — |