USPTO serial 78670762
STANS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SAKAI, ADA HAN
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 106 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with STANS?
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.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
David M. Kelly
DAVID M KELLY FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT &901 NEW YORK AVE NWWASHINGTON, DC 20001-4413UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Gaming services, namely, providing online gaming contests and other games of chance; betting; information services relating to gaming; information services relating to sporting events; casinos; and providing online poker games | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 1, 2007 | 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. |
| Mar 5, 2007 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 5, 2007 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 17, 2007 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 17, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 7, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jul 22, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 12, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 12, 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. |
| Jan 12, 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. |
| Jan 11, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |