Status report
Get it in writing
The official USPTO status record for JUST BECAUSE YOU COULD, DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULD, serial 85371970, 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
JUST BECAUSE YOU COULD, DOESN'T MEAN YOU SHOULDSerial 85371970 · Principal Register
Dead · Refused
Owner: Paramount Pictures Corporation
Class 035 - Advertising & Business
Filed Jul 14, 2011
The record shows the mark “JUST BECAUSE YOU COULD, DOESN’T MEAN YOU SHOULD” is dead – it was abandoned on Feb 10 2014 because the applicant never filed a required Statement of Use after the Notice of Allowance, and no extension was filed thereafter; the owner listed is Paramount Pictures Corporation, a Delaware corporation. The only goods and services covered are “association services, namely, promoting the interests of intellectual property rights holders in the motion picture, television, music, computer software, and video game industries; public advocacy to promote awareness of intellectual property rights and laws…,” all in International Class 035, so a similar phrase used in that same advocacy or industry‑association context would raise the closest record‑based concern. The record does not give Paramount control over every possible use of the wording in unrelated fields. Because the application was on the Principal Register, there is no Supplemental Register sequence to note. The latest meaningful event is the abandonment notice on Feb 10 2014, and the supplied history shows no oppositions, cancellations or other enforcement activity. I'd treat this as a meaningful concern if you plan to use the phrase in a similar IP‑advocacy or entertainment‑industry context.
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.