USPTO serial 78782473
WOULD YOU RATHER...?
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRENCH, CURTIS W
- 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 WOULD YOU RATHER...??
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
New York, NY
KENT TOWN, New York, AU
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | pre-recorded audio CDs featuring spoken humor content | ACTIVE | — |
| 016 | stickers, trading cards, coasters made of paper, postcards, greeting cards and paper napkins | ACTIVE | — |
| 025 | Shirts and hats | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | Interactive cable TV, namely games offered by cable television providers on a pay-per-play or on-demand basis; entertainment services, namely a continuing game or variety show broadcast over cable television, non-cable television and satellite television, and the production of motion pictures for theatrical or television distribution and providing on-line computer games with or without opinion polls built into such 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 Falls Media LLC
- Other trademarks owned by Falls Media LLC
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Other trademarks in Class 025
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named WOULD YOU RATHER...?
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Aug 20, 2009 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 20, 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. |
| Aug 20, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| May 28, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| May 18, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 18, 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. |
| Apr 14, 2009 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jan 26, 2009 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Dec 22, 2008 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| Dec 22, 2008 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 22, 2008 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 22, 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 22, 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. |
| Nov 20, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Mar 3, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 7, 2008 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 7, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Feb 7, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 20, 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. |
| Aug 28, 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. |
| Aug 8, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 23, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| May 18, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| May 17, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 16, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Apr 13, 2007 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Apr 13, 2007 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Mar 22, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 22, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 19, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 26, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Feb 23, 2007 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Dec 4, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 21, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Oct 12, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 9, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 3, 2006 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION 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. |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Jul 1, 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. |
| Jun 22, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 5, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |