USPTO serial 78811259
SHELL WE PLAY? THE BLUE TURTLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SALEMI, DOMINICK
- 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 SHELL WE PLAY? THE BLUE TURTLE?
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.
Roberta Jacobs-Meadway
Roberta Jacobs-Meadway BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP1735 MARKET ST FL 51PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-7599UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 036 | debit card services | ACTIVE | May 31, 2005 |
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 12, 2007 | MAB0 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Oct 12, 2007 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 21, 2007 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 20, 2007 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 21, 2007 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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. |
| Mar 21, 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. |
| Feb 28, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jan 31, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 31, 2007 | 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. |
| Dec 13, 2006 | ASCK | ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP NOT UPDATED AUTOMATICALLY | — |
| Jul 31, 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. |
| Jul 31, 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 31, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 16, 2006 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Feb 15, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |