USPTO serial 77317197
MEGALINE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- TENG, SIMON
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 MEGALINE?
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
SPIELO INTERNATIONAL CANADA ULC
MONCTON, NEW BRUNSWICK, CA
Moncton, New Brunswick, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
David R. Josephs
DAVID R. JOSEPHS BARLOW, JOSEPHS & HOLMES, LTD.101 DYER ST FL 5PROVIDENCE, RI 02903-3926UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | reconfigurable casino and lottery gaming equipment, namely, slot machines and video lottery terminals and operational computer game software 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2011 | 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. |
| Sep 13, 2011 | 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. |
| Jul 13, 2011 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Feb 15, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 26, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 19, 2011 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 26, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2010 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 23, 2010 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 23, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 23, 2010 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 13, 2010 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 27, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 27, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 10, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 7, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 26, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 26, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 26, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 26, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 30, 2007 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Dec 30, 2007 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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. |
| Dec 30, 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. |
| Dec 15, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 6, 2007 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Nov 5, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |