USPTO serial 78935025
WE'RE CRAZY ABOUT PETS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MARTIN, JENNIFER MCGARRY
- 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 WE'RE CRAZY ABOUT PETS?
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.
Hae Park-Suk
HAE PARK-SUK BARNES & THORNBURG LLP750 17TH ST NW STE 900WASHINGTON, DC 20006-4607UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | Providing on-line retail store services featuring pet-related goods; providing a website featuring product ratings of the consumer goods of others in the field of pet products | ACTIVE | — |
| 038 | Providing on-line chat rooms for pet owners for the transmission of messages, information, story postings, sharing pictures, personal videos, personal audio files, among computer users | 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 Intelligent Content Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by Intelligent Content Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 035
- Other trademarks in Class 038
- Similar marks named WE'RE CRAZY ABOUT PETS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 30, 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 30, 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 28, 2009 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 28, 2009 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Apr 28, 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. |
| Oct 29, 2008 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 29, 2008 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Oct 29, 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. |
| May 9, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 9, 2008 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| May 1, 2008 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| May 1, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 30, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 30, 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 7, 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. |
| Jul 18, 2007 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jul 2, 2007 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 29, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 20, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Dec 19, 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. |
| Dec 18, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 27, 2006 | MPMK | NOTICE OF PSEUDO MARK MAILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2006 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |