USPTO serial 78283309
QUICK 7
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LORENZO, GEORGE M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 QUICK 7?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Doran J. Ingalls
DORAN J INGALLS FASKEN MARTINEAU DUMOULIN LLP2900-500 Burrard StreetVANCOUVER, BC V6C 0A3CANADAGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Online entertainment services, namely, providing a website featuring casino services and fantasy casino services in the field of virtual horse races featuring the option to have the computer randomly select seven horses upon which bets are made; and lottery services based on virtual horse racing | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 18, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 15, 2009 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 15, 2009 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 15, 2009 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Dec 24, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Dec 22, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 22, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 4, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 4, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 27, 2008 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 28, 2007 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 19, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Nov 16, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 14, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 14, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Nov 2, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 2, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 1, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2006 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 30, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 30, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 20, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Sep 2, 2005 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 2, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 2, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 26, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 26, 2005 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 26, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Feb 26, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 17, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 17, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 9, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 19, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 17, 2004 | 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. |
| Feb 17, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |