USPTO serial 77008461
THE TOTAL BALL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LAVACHE, LINDA M
- 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 THE TOTAL 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.
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
Palm Beach Gardens, FL
PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL
PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Jonathan Kirsch
Jonathan Kirsch Law Offices of Jonathan Kirsch1880 Century Park EastSuite 515Los Angeles, CA 90067Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | EXERCISE BALL | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by One Partner, LLC
- Other trademarks owned by GREENCAT CAPITAL LLC
- Other trademarks owned by GREENCAT CAPITAL LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 028
- Similar marks named THE TOTAL BALL
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 24, 2011 | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2011 | 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 24, 2010 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST MAILED | — |
| Jun 23, 2010 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 21, 2010 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 21, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 4, 2010 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 23, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 15, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 15, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 22, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 24, 2008 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 22, 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. |
| Dec 22, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 25, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 12, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 28, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 28, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 18, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 11, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2007 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Feb 5, 2007 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 2, 2007 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Feb 1, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 3, 2006 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |