USPTO serial 76575354
DESERT PALACE CASINO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCMORROW, RONALD G
- 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 DESERT PALACE CASINO?
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.
R. Scott Weide
R SCOTT WEIDE WEIDE & MILLER LTD7251 W LAKE MEAD BLVD STE 530BANK WEST BLDG 5TH FLLAS VEGAS, NV 89128Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | Gaming equipment, namely, chip racks and trays, playing cards, dice, and gaming boards | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Nov 24, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2006 | PGEX | PETITION GRANTED - EXTENSION REQUEST FILED | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 27, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 15, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 15, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 15, 2005 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 21, 2005 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 10, 2005 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 10, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 15, 2005 | 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 21, 2004 | 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. |
| Dec 1, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 13, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 8, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 7, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 7, 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 7, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 4, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 1, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 1, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 1, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 27, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |