Brandinium

Trademark search for:

BRAIN DRINK

EXPIRED USPTO USPTO

No active United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) registrations found, based on publicly available USPTO trademark records.

Trademark records may change over time. For the most up-to-date trademark status, domain availability, and social handle checks, run a live search.

Live search · Most up-to-date results
Also check across: EU CA AU NZ CH

USPTO Filing History

Key events recorded for this trademark application

  • 2004-07-20 — Application filed
  • 2004-07-29 — Application filed
  • 2005-02-22 — Final disposition recorded
  • 2005-02-22 — Assigned to examiner
  • 2005-02-24 — Final disposition recorded
  • 2005-02-24 — Final disposition recorded
  • 2005-08-24 — Office action issued
  • 2005-08-24 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2005-08-29 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2005-08-30 — Suspension letter written
  • 2005-08-30 — Letter of suspension mailed
  • 2006-02-07 — Assigned to examiner
  • 2006-03-01 — Suspension inquiry written
  • 2006-03-01 — Inquiry as to suspension mailed
  • 2006-03-06 — Office action issued
  • 2006-03-06 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2006-03-10 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2006-03-13 — Suspension letter written
  • 2006-03-13 — Letter of suspension mailed
  • 2006-09-13 — Suspension letter written
  • 2006-09-13 — Letter of suspension mailed
  • 2007-01-14 — Teas change of correspondence received
  • 2007-03-13 — Report completed suspension check case still suspended
  • 2007-09-13 — Suspension inquiry written
  • 2007-09-13 — Inquiry to suspension e-mailed
  • 2007-09-13 — Notification of inquiry as to suspension e-mailed
  • 2008-02-23 — Teas change of owner address received
  • 2008-02-23 — Applicant/correspondence changes (non-responsive) entered
  • 2008-03-13 — Teas response to suspension inquiry received
  • 2008-03-13 — Correspondence received in law office
  • 2008-03-14 — Teas/email correspondence entered
  • 2008-03-17 — Approved for pub - principal register
  • 2008-03-29 — Assigned to lie
  • 2008-03-29 — Law office publication review completed
  • 2008-04-16 — Notice of publication
  • 2008-05-06 — Published for opposition
  • 2008-07-29 — Noa mailed - sou required from applicant
  • 2009-01-22 — Sou teas extension received
  • 2009-01-22 — Sou extension 1 filed
  • 2009-01-22 — Sou extension 1 granted
  • 2009-07-25 — Sou teas extension received
  • 2009-07-25 — Sou extension 2 filed
  • 2009-08-26 — Case assigned to intent to use paralegal
  • 2009-08-26 — Sou extension 2 granted
  • 2010-01-21 — Sou teas extension received
  • 2010-01-21 — Sou extension 3 filed
  • 2010-01-27 — Sou extension 3 granted
  • 2010-07-12 — Sou teas extension received
  • 2010-07-12 — Sou extension 4 filed
  • 2010-07-13 — Sou extension 4 granted
  • 2010-07-14 — Notice of approval of extension request e-mailed
  • 2010-12-28 — Sou teas extension received
  • 2010-12-28 — Sou extension 5 filed
  • 2011-01-06 — Sou extension 5 granted
  • 2011-01-07 — Notice of approval of extension request e-mailed
  • 2011-07-25 — Teas post publication amendment received
  • 2011-07-25 — Notice of allowance cancelled
  • 2011-08-03 — 1(b) basis deleted; proceed to registration
  • 2011-09-06 — Registered-principal register
  • 2011-10-12 — Case assigned to post registration paralegal
  • 2011-10-13 — Correction under section 7 - processed
  • 2016-11-22 — Teas change of correspondence received
  • 2017-04-05 — Teas change of correspondence received
  • 2018-04-13 — Cancelled sec. 8 (6-yr)
  • 2018-04-13 — Final status recorded

Owner Information

Distribution & Marketing GmbH
5303 Thalgau AT
Distribution & Marketing GmbH
5303 Thalgau AT
Distribution & Marketing GmbH
5303 Thalgau AT

Correspondent

Martin R. Greenstein TechMark a Law Corporation
4820 Harwood Road, 2nd Floor
San Jose, CA 95124-5273
UNITED STATES

Filing Details

Filing Date:
2004-07-20
Status Date:
2018-04-13
Filing Year:
2004

Disclaimer: This page is informational only and does not constitute legal advice. Trademark availability depends on jurisdiction, usage, and legal interpretation.