USPTO serial 86434500
SUPER SWEEP POKER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BULLOFF, TOBY ELLEN
- 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 SUPER SWEEP POKER?
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.
Brian Fitzgerald
BRIAN FITZGERALD KOPPEL PATRICK HEYBL & PHILPOTT2815 TOWNSGATE RD STE 215WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CA 91361-5827UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Computer software and firmware for games of chance on any computerized platform, including dedicated gaming consoles, video based slot machines, reel based slot machines, video lottery terminals, tablets and smartphones; Computer game software for use on mobile and cellular phones, portable media players, and handheld computers | 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 Felsher, Andy
- Other trademarks owned by Felsher, Andy
- Other trademarks owned by Uribe, Julie
- Other trademarks owned by Uribe, Julie
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named SUPER SWEEP POKER
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 6, 2017 | 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. |
| Feb 6, 2017 | 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. |
| Aug 6, 2016 | EXRA | NOTICE OF APPROVAL OF EXTENSION REQUEST E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 6, 2016 | NOAC | CORRECTED NOA E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 2016 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Aug 5, 2016 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 23, 2016 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Jul 1, 2016 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 1, 2016 | ERTD | TEAS REQUEST TO DIVIDE RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 30, 2016 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 30, 2016 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 2016 | NOAM | NOA E-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. |
| Nov 10, 2015 | NPUB | OFFICIAL GAZETTE PUBLICATION CONFIRMATION E-MAILED | — |
| Nov 10, 2015 | 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. |
| Oct 21, 2015 | NONP | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF PUBLICATION E-MAILED | — |
| Oct 2, 2015 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Sep 29, 2015 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Sep 2, 2015 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 20, 2015 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Aug 19, 2015 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 19, 2015 | 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. |
| Feb 19, 2015 | 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. |
| Feb 19, 2015 | 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. |
| Feb 19, 2015 | 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. |
| Feb 11, 2015 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 3, 2014 | NWOS | NEW APPLICATION OFFICE SUPPLIED DATA ENTERED | — |
| Oct 28, 2014 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |