USPTO serial 78811486
QWIKFLIP
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KOVALSKY, LAURA G
- Law office
- PETITIONS OFFICE
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 QWIKFLIP?
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.
Mary Beth Ciocco
MARY BETH CIOCCO MARY BETH CIOCCO LLC22255 CTR RIDGE RD STE 106ROCKY RIVER, OH 44116-3950UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | Toys, namely, building blocks, doll houses and toy mobiles; playground equipment, namely, slides and swings; inflatable swimming pool articles for play; playing balls; toy vehicles; toys for domestic pets; imitation bedroom articles being toys; imitation kitchen articles being toys; imitation supermarket articles being toys; toys of chalkboard; toys of whiteboard, and drawing toys, namely, plastic character toys, punching toys and children's multiple activity toys; playcarts; play apparatus in the form of desks; play apparatus in the form of chairs; children's toys in the form of self-adhesive figures to be attached to boards | ACTIVE | May 1, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 12, 2009 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 9, 2009 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Oct 22, 2009 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 22, 2009 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 4, 2007 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Oct 4, 2007 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Mar 5, 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 5, 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 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 28, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| 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. |
| 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 15, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |