Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for PASSION PARTY, PASSION PARTIES, PURPLE RAYNE PASSIONS, [email protected], WWW.PURPLERAYNEPASSIONS.COM, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], SEX TOYS, LUBRICANTS, VIBRATORS, DILDOS, PLEASURE TOYS, LOTIONS, serial 77197142, 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
PASSION PARTY, PASSION PARTIES, PURPLE RAYNE PASSIONS, [email protected], WWW.PURPLERAYNEPASSIONS.COM, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], SEX TOYS, LUBRICANTS, VIBRATORS, DILDOS, PLEASURE TOYS, LOTIONSSerial 77197142 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: PURPLE RAYNE PASSIONS
Class 200 -
Filed
The record shows that the mark “PASSION PARTY, PASSION PARTIES, PURPLE RAYNE PASSIONS” is dead and was refused because the application did not meet minimum filing date requirements; the serial number was assigned in error. The owner listed is PURPLE RAYNE PASSIONS, a sole proprietorship organized in California. The only goods or services listed are “Indicating membership in a home‑based passion party business,” class 200, with first use in 1996 and use in commerce in March 2007. Because the mark is not registered and the application was void, the record does not give the owner control over every use of the wording. No enforcement activity such as oppositions or cancellations appears in the supplied history. The closest concern for a similar name would be in the same home‑based party‑membership context. If you are thinking of using a similar name, this history suggests a potential but not definitive risk in that specific area.
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.