USPTO serial 85708019
YAPIT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GALAN, MATTHEW
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 113 - 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 YAPIT?
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
ST. LOUIS, MO
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
PENNY R. SLICER. REG. NO. 34,017
PENNY R. SLICER. REG. NO. 34,017 STINSON MORRISON HECKER LLP1201 WALNUT ST STE 2900KANSAS CITY, MO 64106-2178UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | PROVIDING A WEBSITE AND ON-LINE FORUM FOR SELLERS OF PRODUCTS TO DISPLAY, DEMONSTRATE AND PROMOTE THEIR PRODUCTS AND BRANDS; PROVIDING A WEBSITE AND ON-LINE FORUM FOR PRODUCT SELLERS TO ENGAGE PRODUCT SPOKESPEOPLE AND/OR VIDEO PRODUCERS TO DEVELOP PROMOTIONAL VIDEOS FOR PROMOTING THE SELLERS' PRODUCTS AND BRANDS; PROVIDING A WEBSITE AND ON-LINE FORUM THAT ENABLES USERS TO UPLOAD ON-LINE VIDEOS FOR SHARING WITH OTHERS TO PROMOTE A SELLERS' PRODUCTS AND BRANDS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 18, 2013 | 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. |
| Jul 18, 2013 | 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 20, 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. |
| Dec 13, 2012 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 28, 2012 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |