USPTO serial 77497476
!DENTITY CRISIS?
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FICKES, JERI J
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 107 - 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 !DENTITY CRISIS??
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Timothy P. Fraelich
TIMOTHY P. FRAELICH JONES DAY901 LAKESIDE AVE E STE 2CLEVELAND, OH 44114-1190UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely, production and distribution of a television game show | 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 22, 2012 | 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 22, 2012 | 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 25, 2011 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2011 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2011 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 25, 2011 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 25, 2011 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2011 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 25, 2011 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 20, 2011 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 20, 2011 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 19, 2011 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 18, 2011 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 14, 2010 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2010 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 14, 2010 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 23, 2010 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jan 20, 2010 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2010 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2010 | 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 28, 2009 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 2, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 29, 2009 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 27, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 27, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 4, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 4, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 4, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 20, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 24, 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. |
| Sep 19, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 17, 2008 | MDSM | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |