USPTO serial 78670838
THE WHISPERING MAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DONINGER, CHRISTOPHER G
- 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 THE WHISPERING MAN?
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.
Lauren A. Dienes-Middlen
Lauren A. Dienes-Middlen WWE FILMS, INC.1241 E MAIN STSTAMFORD, CT 06902-3521UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | Toy action figures and accessories therefor; cases for action figures; toy vehicles; board games; playing cards; toy spinning tops; stand alone video output game machines; arcade games; pinball games; hand-held units for playing electronic game; tabletop action skill games; jigsaw puzzles; kites; dolls; bobble-head dolls; puppets; stuffed toy animals; card games; toy guitars; water guns; Christmas tree decorations; costume masks; doll furniture; party favors in the nature of crackers and noisemakers; skateboards; windup toys; toy scooters; yo-yo`s; plastic model kits for making toy vehicles; toy foam hands | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 18, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 22, 2009 | EX5G | SOU EXTENSION 5 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 19, 2009 | EXT5 | SOU EXTENSION 5 FILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 9, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 8, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 18, 2008 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Dec 18, 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. |
| Jun 24, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 19, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Jan 15, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 19, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Jun 19, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 19, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Sep 26, 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. |
| Sep 6, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 1, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 1, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 25, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jul 19, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 18, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jan 18, 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 18, 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 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 20, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |