Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for VAROOM V, serial 74589914, as a dated PDF. One price, one document, delivered in about a minute.
INSTANT DELIVERY
Trademark Status Report
$7.99
The USPTO's own status record for this mark, on one dated page.
- Current status with a plain-English verdict
- Owner, classes, filing basis, and every key date
- The mark as it appears on the federal record
- Every prosecution event, filing to today
- Source-cited with the exact retrieval date
Built from the USPTO's TSDR record. Assignment chain of title and TTAB proceeding files sit in separate USPTO systems and are not included.
Preview
◆ TRADEMARKCHECKER.AITRADEMARK STATUS REPORT
VAROOM VSerial 74589914 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: Motorhead Productions, Inc.
Class 014 -
Class 016 - Paper Goods & Printed Matter
Class 021 -
Class 025 - Clothing
Class 029 - Meats & Processed Foods
Class 030 - Staple Foods
Class 041 - Education & Entertainment
Class 042 - Scientific & Technology Services
Filed Oct 24, 1994
The record shows that VAROOM V is a dead application that was abandoned on September 18 1999 because the owner never filed a required Statement of Use after the Notice of Allowance, and the mark never entered registration; the owner listed is Motorhead Productions, Inc., a corporation organized in Illinois. The filing covered a wide range of goods, including jewelry, plastic tableware, clothing items such as jackets and T‑shirts, potato chips, sauces, posters and auto‑racing books, amusement‑arcade services and restaurant services, so a similar name used in any of those categories would present the closest record‑based concern. The record does not give the owner control over every possible use of the word “VAROOM V,” only over the specific goods and services listed. Because the application was on the Principal Register and never moved to the Supplemental Register, there is no supplemental‑register sequence to note. The latest meaningful event is the abandonment entry on September 18 1999, and the supplied history shows no oppositions, cancellations or other enforcement actions. I'd treat this as a meaningful concern if you plan to use a similar name for any of the listed products or services.
Full event history, owner details, and verdict inside.
The way I'd use it, honestly, is as the thing you attach when a bank, a marketplace, or a co-founder asks "are we clear on the name". It answers in one page.