USPTO serial 78629624
JUNGLENUTS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KIM, YONG OH
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 JUNGLENUTS?
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
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark Andrew Goldstein
MARK ANDREW GOLDSTEIN SOCAL IP LAW GROUP LLP310 N WESTLAKE BLVD STE 120WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91362-3788UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Pre-recorded video tapes, DVDs, CD-ROMs and computer readable disks, all featuring cartoons and children's animation; motion picture films and short films, all featuring cartoons and children's animation; computer game software; video game software; screensaver, wallpaper and icon software for computers, personal digital assistants and cellular telephones | 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 10, 2009 | CORV | REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 4, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 3, 2009 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Feb 3, 2009 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Jan 27, 2009 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 27, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Oct 27, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 24, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Mar 24, 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. |
| Oct 5, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 26, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Sep 26, 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 23, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 23, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Mar 23, 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. |
| Sep 26, 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. |
| Jul 4, 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. |
| Jun 14, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 15, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 5, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 25, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 25, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 25, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 12, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 6, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 6, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 7, 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. |
| Oct 7, 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. |
| Oct 7, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 20, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |