USPTO serial 78296077
CHILLY BEACH
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CARTY, GEORGIA
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 CHILLY BEACH?
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
Toronto, Ontario, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Roger H. Bora
Roger H. Bora Thompson Hine LLP2000 Courthouse Plaza NE 10 W. Second StDayton, OH 45402UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | clothing, namely, sweatshirts, tank tops, boxer shorts, loungewear, sportswear, namely, jerseys, sports shirts, polo shirts, golf shirts, activewear, namely, sleepwear, underwear, outerwear, namely, jackets, scarves | ACTIVE | — |
| 028 | toys, namely, model plastic toy figurines; plush toys and stuffed toys; games, namely, action skill games and board games; hand-held units for playing electronic games | 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, 2009 | 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. |
| Feb 2, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 1, 2008 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jul 1, 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 28, 2007 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 28, 2007 | 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. |
| Jun 29, 2007 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 2, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 2, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 5, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 3, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jan 3, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 29, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 29, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 29, 2006 | 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 3, 2006 | 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 11, 2005 | 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 21, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 27, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 24, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 14, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 19, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 1, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 1, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 5, 2004 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Nov 5, 2004 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Oct 4, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 24, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 24, 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. |
| Mar 21, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |