USPTO serial 76673149
BAD BOY MTV
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CORDOVA, RAUL
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 BAD BOY MTV?
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
Batesville, AR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Trent C. Keisling
S. Christian Gunn Keisling & Pieper PLCP.O. Box 10379Fayetteville, AR 72703UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 012 | 4-wheeled, multi-terrain vehicles | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 14, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 7, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 4, 2010 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 4, 2010 | 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. |
| Oct 22, 2009 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 22, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 20, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 3, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Sep 3, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 8, 2009 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Sep 30, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 30, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 30, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 16, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 14, 2008 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 14, 2008 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 14, 2008 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Sep 14, 2008 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 14, 2008 | 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 13, 2008 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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 12, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 12, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 7, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 12, 2007 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 11, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 4, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 21, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 20, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 12, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |