USPTO serial 77399948
SUGAR RUSH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CALLAGHAN, BRIAN P
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 SUGAR RUSH?
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
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA, CA
Nexon Publishing North America Inc.
Vancouver, B.C., CA
Other trademarks owned by Nexon Publishing North America Inc.
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
James M. Slattery
JAMES M. SLATTERY BIRCH STEWART KOLASCH & BIRCH LLPPO BOX 747FALLS CHURCH, VA 22040-0747UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Video game cartridges and discs; computer programs, namely, computer game software and downloadable computer game programs | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 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. |
| Feb 2, 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 7, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 7, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 2, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 30, 2009 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2009 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2009 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 30, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Dec 30, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 29, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 23, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | UNDC | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - COURTESY COPY MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 25, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 11, 2009 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 12, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 15, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 15, 2008 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 30, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 30, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 30, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 28, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 2008 | 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. |
| May 31, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 22, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |