USPTO serial 78466199
THANK A BOOK
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MORRIS, KRISTINA KLOIBER
- 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 THANK A BOOK?
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.
Carol H. Peters
Carol H. Peters MINTZ LEVIN COHN & FERRIS1 FINANCIAL CTRBOSTON, MA 02111-2657UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 The Writers' Room of Boston, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by The Writers' Room of Boston, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Other trademarks in Class 025
- Similar marks named THANK A BOOK
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 23, 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 23, 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. |
| Dec 4, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 4, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 24, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Nov 24, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Nov 24, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 23, 2008 | 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. |
| Sep 23, 2008 | 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 24, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| May 27, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 20, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| May 20, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 20, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | 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 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 24, 2007 | 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. |
| May 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 11, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 6, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 6, 2007 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 29, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 3, 2007 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 3, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 3, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 5, 2006 | 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. |
| Jul 5, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 14, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 25, 2006 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 1, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 30, 2005 | 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. |
| Nov 29, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 17, 2005 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Mar 17, 2005 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Mar 16, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 20, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |