Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for PAWSICLES. A POPSICLE TREAT FOR DOGS. COMES IN VARIOUS FLAVORS. CHICKEN, BEEF, ECT... WITH EXTRA INGREDIENT TO MAKE IT A HEALTHY YUMMY COOL TREAT. IT ALSO COMES IN FARIOUS ANIMAL SHAPES. IT ALSO HAS AN EDIBLE STICK TO LOOK LIKE A POPSICLE., serial 78030529, 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
PAWSICLES. A POPSICLE TREAT FOR DOGS. COMES IN VARIOUS FLAVORS. CHICKEN, BEEF, ECT... WITH EXTRA INGREDIENT TO MAKE IT A HEALTHY YUMMY COOL TREAT. IT ALSO COMES IN FARIOUS ANIMAL SHAPES. IT ALSO HAS AN EDIBLE STICK TO LOOK LIKE A POPSICLE.Serial 78030529 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: Johnson, Christina M
Class 031 -
Filed Oct 13, 2000
The record shows that the mark “PAWSICLES. A POPSICLE TREAT FOR DOGS…” was filed by Christina M. Johnson on October 13, 2000 and was abandoned on December 14, 2001 because the applicant did not respond to an Office action. The mark was never registered and remains dead. It covered dog treats that are popsicle‑shaped, flavored with chicken, beef, and other ingredients, and sold in various animal shapes with an edible stick. Because the mark was abandoned, it does not give the owner control over the wording in any class or across all goods. The prosecution history shows a non‑final action mailed in March 2001, an assignment to an examiner, and then abandonment for failure to respond. No opposition, cancellation, or court action appears in the supplied history, so there is no visible enforcement activity. For someone looking at a similar name, the closest concern would be the specific dog‑treat category; otherwise the record offers no broader protection.
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.