USPTO serial 78554394
BABELAND
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MCCAULEY, BRENDAN D
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105
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 BABELAND?
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.
Lex Mathis Sound Law Group, PLLC
Lex Mathis Sound Law Group, PLLC SOUND LAW GROUP, PLLC75 E Agate #402Las Vegas, NV 89123UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Online retail store services and retail store services featuring sexual aids, sex toys including rubber, plastic, leather, glass and metal items for penetration and receptacle, erotic clothing and other adult oriented products, namely vibrators lotions, publications and videos | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 9, 2008 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Jan 23, 2008 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Jan 11, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 4, 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. |
| Dec 4, 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 14, 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. |
| Aug 22, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 2, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 28, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 20, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 20, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 20, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 20, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jun 8, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| May 3, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| May 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 3, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Mar 23, 2006 | 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. |
| Mar 23, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 24, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |