USPTO serial 78698645
MAXIMUM TACKLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STEEL, ALYSSA PALADINO
- Law office
- DIVISIONAL UNIT
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 MAXIMUM TACKLE?
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.
Catherine H. Stockell
Catherine H. Stockell Fish & Richardson, P.C.PO Box 1022Minneapolis, MN 55440-1022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Entertainment services, namely, providing on-line computer 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named MAXIMUM TACKLE
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 9, 2009 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 2009 | 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 17, 2009 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 17, 2009 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 17, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Apr 9, 2009 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2009 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 2009 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 9, 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. |
| Feb 24, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Feb 24, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 8, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 8, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Oct 8, 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. |
| Apr 10, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 10, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 10, 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. |
| Feb 1, 2008 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Feb 1, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 9, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 9, 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. |
| Jul 18, 2007 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Apr 10, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 16, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 27, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Dec 2, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Dec 1, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 28, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 28, 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. |
| Mar 17, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION 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 16, 2006 | 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 16, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Mar 15, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 15, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Sep 22, 2005 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 31, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |