USPTO serial 78468121
FLYING CLOUD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SPARACINO, MARK V
- 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 FLYING CLOUD?
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.
Brian Beverly
BRIAN BEVERLY BEESON SKINNER BEVERLY LLP1 KAISER PLZ STE 750OAKLAND, CA 94612-3611UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Casino services; entertainment services in the nature of live music concerts and dance performances | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 3, 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. |
| May 3, 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 25, 2006 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 2, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 31, 2006 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 10, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 10, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 8, 2006 | INCE | ITU OFFICE ACTION ISSUED FOR EXTENSION REQUEST | — |
| Aug 28, 2006 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 28, 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. |
| Dec 6, 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. |
| Nov 16, 2005 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Oct 14, 2005 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Oct 7, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 5, 2005 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 16, 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. |
| Mar 18, 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 18, 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 18, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 24, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |