USPTO serial 78706876
SLICK-BALL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SNAPP, TINA LOUISE
- 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 SLICK-BALL?
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
Woodland Hills, CA
Woodland Hills, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 002 | Golf ball restorer, namely, golf ball cover coatings | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Dec 8, 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. |
| Aug 29, 2008 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 29, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 31, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Jul 31, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jul 31, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 10, 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. |
| Jul 10, 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. |
| May 7, 2008 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Nov 28, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 7, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 7, 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. |
| Aug 10, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 7, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 7, 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. |
| Nov 7, 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 15, 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. |
| Jul 26, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 23, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 16, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 15, 2006 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| May 24, 2006 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| May 17, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 17, 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 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. |
| Mar 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. |
| Mar 18, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 12, 2005 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |