USPTO serial 85692358
VIDEO RIDDLE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CLARK, ROBERT C
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 101 - 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 VIDEO RIDDLE?
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
Grand Cayman, KY
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 041 | Providing amusement arcade services; providing entertainment information, namely, information about computer games and amusement arcades; video and computer game services provided on-line from a computer network; organization of online computer game competitions; publication of electronic books and journals on-line; providing on-line, non-downloadable website articles in the field of computer gaming; entertainment services, namely, providing on-line computer and video games; entertainment services, namely, providing online, non-downloadable virtual items in the nature of environments, characters, buildings, vehicles, plants, animals, clothing, building materials, land, household goods, tools, food, drinks, currency, and furniture, for use in on-line computer 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2019 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Oct 15, 2019 | 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 14, 2019 | 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 18, 2019 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2019 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2018 | WOAG | WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY GRANTED | — |
| Oct 4, 2018 | WOAR | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 18, 2018 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2018 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 18, 2018 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 17, 2018 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 17, 2018 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 13, 2018 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2018 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2018 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2018 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 22, 2017 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2017 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2017 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 21, 2017 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2017 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 19, 2017 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 12, 2017 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 13, 2017 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2017 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 13, 2017 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 12, 2016 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2016 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 12, 2016 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 9, 2016 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 9, 2016 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 1, 2016 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2016 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2016 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 22, 2016 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 22, 2015 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2015 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 22, 2015 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 21, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 21, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 15, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 15, 2015 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 3, 2015 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 2015 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 3, 2015 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 3, 2014 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2014 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 3, 2014 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 26, 2014 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Sep 26, 2014 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 24, 2014 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 4, 2014 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2014 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2014 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 4, 2013 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2013 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 4, 2013 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 2, 2013 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 2, 2013 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 26, 2013 | ERSI | TEAS RESPONSE TO SUSPENSION INQUIRY RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 6, 2013 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Jun 26, 2013 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jun 21, 2013 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 21, 2013 | EWAF | TEAS WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY RECEIVED-FIRM RETAINS | — |
| Apr 12, 2013 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2013 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 12, 2013 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 12, 2012 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2012 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 2012 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 5, 2012 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 5, 2012 | AMPX | PRELIMINARY/VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT - ENTERED | — |
| Oct 5, 2012 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 2, 2012 | GNRN | NOTIFICATION OF 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. |
| Oct 2, 2012 | 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. |
| Oct 2, 2012 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 9, 2012 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Aug 4, 2012 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |