USPTO serial 78394087
WILD WITCHES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- RINGLE, JAMES W
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 WILD WITCHES?
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
INDIANAPOLIS, IN
INDIANAPOLIS, IN
INDIANAPOLIS, IN
INDIANAPOLIS, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, IN
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Randee Sibul-Gelbert
RANDEE SIBUL-GELBERT MEITUS GELBERT LLP10 W MARKET ST STE 1025INDINAPOLIS, IN 46204UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Household and kitchen utensils and containers, namely, punch bowl sets comprised of bowl and cups, dinnerware, and beverage glassware | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by REDCATS USA, L.P.
- Other trademarks owned by REDCATS USA, L.P.
- Other trademarks owned by REDCATS USA, L.P.
- Other trademarks owned by REDCATS USA, L.P.
- Other trademarks owned by Brylane, L.P.
- Other trademarks owned by Brylane, L.P.
- Other trademarks in Class 021
- Similar marks named WILD WITCHES
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 10, 2011 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Mar 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 13, 2007 | 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. |
| Nov 22, 2006 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Oct 25, 2006 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 28, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jun 28, 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 25, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 4, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jan 4, 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. |
| Oct 7, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | 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. |
| Apr 12, 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. |
| Mar 23, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 12, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jan 7, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 4, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jan 3, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 20, 2004 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 19, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 27, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 8, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |