Trademark — MOOSEQUEST (USPTO)

STATUS UPDATE — 2026-04-22: The MOOSEQUEST mark is DEAD / ABANDONED. TSDR lookup confirms the 2013 application (serial 86072931) was abandoned May 18, 2015 for failure to file a Statement of Use within the required 6 months of the Apr 15, 2014 Notice of Allowance. There is no live registration to maintain. The strategy is a new filing, not renewal. See "Current state + fresh-filing path" section below.

Status: research-only. Nothing here is legal advice. Before filing a new application, assignment, or any USPTO declaration, consult a trademark attorney admitted to practice before the USPTO.

Last updated: 2026-04-22. USPTO fees and form availability change — verify at time of filing. All fee figures are per 37 CFR § 2.6 as published on the current USPTO fee schedule (cited below).

TL;DR

The 2013 MOOSEQUEST application was a Section 1(b) Intent-to-Use filing that passed publication and received a Notice of Allowance, but the applicant did not file a Statement of Use within the required window. The mark has been abandoned since May 2015. To get MOOSEQUEST registered now, the path is a fresh Section 1(a) use-based application with moosequest.net serving as specimen of use. This is the same USPTO path, not a revival — the 2013 application is a closed case. Fee tables in Steps 3-5 below still apply directly to the new filing.

Current state + fresh-filing path

Status of the 2013 application (confirmed via TSDR 2026-04-22)

What this means

• No maintenance obligations. Sections 8 and 9 apply to live registrations only; there's nothing to maintain. The §8/§9 framing in Steps 2 below is preserved for future reference but is not applicable until a new registration issues.
• No ownership to transfer. The assignment framing in Step 4 below doesn't apply to an abandoned application; there's no rights-in-the-mark to move into the LLC. Common-law rights may exist from actual use of "MooseQuest" in commerce, but those are separate from registered rights.
• MOOSEQUEST is legally available to file again — subject to an availability search by the attorney, confirming no other party has claimed MOOSEQUEST in IC 035 during the 11-year gap.
• Fresh filing basis should be Section 1(a) use-based, not 1(b) ITU. The prior ITU filing died on the SoU deadline; a 1(a) filing requires current use in commerce at filing time, which moosequest.net satisfies.

Recommended path (attorney confirms)

• File fresh under Section 1(a). Applicant: ideally the PA LLC once formed (#153), otherwise Kristerpher Henderson personally with later assignment.
• Target class: 035 (same as 2013 filing). Covers technology consulting services described on moosequest.net.
• Specimen of use: screenshot of moosequest.net Services page displaying the MOOSEQUEST mark, with services described in Class 035 language. Site must be live at the time of filing.
• Engage a trademark attorney — DIY filing failed in 2013 on a missed SoU deadline. Attorney handles docketing + improves filing quality. See attorney consult card in parent epic.
• Cost estimate: $500-1500 attorney flat fee + $250-350 USPTO fee per class (TEAS Standard basic). Total ~$750-1850 for single-class filing.
• Timeline: typical 9-15 months from filing to registration, assuming no office actions.

Interaction with RAXX filing

If filing RAXX separately, different classes apply: - Class 009 (computer software — downloadable apps, SaaS) - Class 036 (financial services) — may apply if Raxx positions as a financial tool rather than pure software

Separate applications vs combined filings is an attorney decision. See trademark strategy card for the path (a) / (b) / (c) framing. Recommended path is (c) file both.

Step 1 — (HISTORICAL — TSDR record already pulled)

Retained for reference. The TSDR pull completed on 2026-04-22; record captured above. If the mark were not already looked up, the steps would be:

1. Open https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/search/search-information
2. Search for MOOSEQUEST as a word mark, owner Kris Henderson or Kristerpher Henderson or any associated entity you used at the time of filing.
3. Capture from the result record: - Serial number, Registration number, Filing date, Registration date, Current status, International class(es), Owner, Register
4. Open https://tsdr.uspto.gov/ and paste the serial or registration number for the full document history.

Step 2 — (N/A — maintenance framing preserved for future reference after fresh filing registers)

Retained for reference once the new application registers. For a live Principal Register registration, required maintenance is:

Grace period: six months after each deadline, with an additional grace-period fee per class. Miss the grace period and the registration is canceled — there is no revival. (USPTO [1])

Optional §15 Declaration of Incontestability: available once the mark has been in continuous use in commerce for at least 5 years. Most owners file it combined with the year-5-to-6 §8. (USPTO [1])

Lesson from 2013: the prior filing was a Section 1(b) ITU; the required post-NOA filing was a Statement of Use within 6 months of the Apr 15, 2014 NOA (or extension requests). Missing this deadline caused abandonment. A Section 1(a) use-based filing avoids the SoU step entirely — use must be in commerce at filing time, and proof (specimen) is submitted with the application.

Step 3 — current USPTO fee schedule (per 37 CFR § 2.6)

Fees are per class and electronic-filing unless otherwise noted. Paper filings are accepted only in narrow circumstances. (USPTO [2])

Source: USPTO fee schedule, 37 CFR § 2.6 table [2]. Verify the current table at filing time — fee adjustments have historically taken effect in January (the last adjustment took effect January 18, 2025, alongside the Trademark Center launch that retired TEAS [3]).

Step 4 — assignment of the mark to a future Raxx entity

When the user forms an LLC (or other entity) for Raxx, the MOOSEQUEST mark can stay owned by Kris personally or be assigned into the entity. The considerations:

• Chain of title. Whoever uses the mark in commerce must have a valid chain of title back to the original registrant. If the entity uses the MOOSEQUEST mark on its products or marketing but the registration is in Kris's personal name, the entity needs a license (exclusive, naked, or otherwise) or an assignment.
• Assignment of use-based mark. Assignments of a use-based registration must include the goodwill of the business symbolized by the mark. An assignment "in gross" (without goodwill) is void as a matter of federal law. (This is settled trademark-law doctrine — verify framing with counsel; primary authority is the Lanham Act § 10.)
• Recordation. Assignments are recorded with the USPTO via the Electronic Trademark Assignment System (ETAS). Recordation is not legally required to transfer ownership but is required to be effective against subsequent bona-fide purchasers and to update the USPTO ownership of record.
• Fee to record an assignment. Per 37 CFR § 2.6, recording an assignment is $40 per property for the first mark and $25 per property for each additional mark in the same document (electronic filing). Verify on the fee schedule at filing time [2].

DIY vs. attorney — a judgment call the user needs an attorney for:

• DIY via the new Trademark Center is feasible for the §8 or combined §§8 and 9 maintenance filing if the goods/services and specimens are clean — but the USPTO runs a Post-Registration Audit Program that random-samples §8 filings and demands additional specimen evidence. A deficient audit response can lead to cancellation. (USPTO [1])
• An assignment that correctly transfers the goodwill is usually drafted by a trademark attorney. A one-line DIY assignment can be challenged later. Flag to the user: talk to a trademark attorney before assigning.

Step 5 — Raxx as a separate (future) mark

The Raxx name is independent of the MOOSEQUEST mark. If Raxx is the commercial brand going forward, the user likely wants:

1. A clearance search on RAXX in IC 009 (downloadable software) and IC 042 (SaaS) at minimum. The new Trademark Search UI is free and usable for knock-out searches; a real clearance by a trademark attorney costs ~$400–$1,500.
2. An intent-to-use (§1(b)) application can be filed before launch; the user has up to 36 months (six 6-month extensions, paid) after allowance to file a Statement of Use proving the mark is actually in commerce.
3. Budget: base application $350/class + SOU $150/class when ready. So a single-class RAXX filing from application to registration on the Principal Register runs ~$500–$600 in pure USPTO fees, plus attorney time (~$500–$2,000 for a simple filing).

Do not file a RAXX application until: - The user has confirmed brand direction (see README.md Question 2). - A clearance search has been done. - The applicant entity exists (or the user knowingly files in personal name with a plan to assign to the entity post-formation).

Jurisdiction flags

• USPTO is federal. The above covers only federal registration.
• State common-law trademark rights attach wherever the mark is used in commerce, independent of federal registration. They are narrower geographically and harder to enforce.
• International (Madrid Protocol, EU, UK, CA) is out of scope for this doc. If Raxx is sold outside the US, flag it for the attorney early.

Timing / deadlines

Cannot finalize without the MOOSEQUEST registration date. Highest-priority action for the user: 5-minute TSDR lookup (Step 1 above) to pull the registration date and current status. Once that is in hand, the §8 and §§8/9 windows are mechanical.

Questions for your trademark attorney

1. Is the MOOSEQUEST registration currently in good standing per TSDR, and is the next maintenance window (§8 at year 5 or combined §§8 and 9 at year 9) more than 12 months away?
2. Should MOOSEQUEST be assigned to the future Raxx LLC, or kept in Kris's personal name and licensed to the entity? (Tax, asset-protection, and succession implications.)
3. If MOOSEQUEST was filed without a trademark attorney, is there any current defect in the registration (broad identifications, specimens that would fail an audit, unrecorded changes in ownership) we should fix now?
4. For the RAXX mark: do you recommend §1(b) intent-to-use filing now, or waiting until the product is live enough for a §1(a) use-based filing?
5. What IC classes do you recommend for RAXX (IC 009 downloadable software, IC 042 SaaS, IC 036 financial services, IC 041 education — options-trading content sits across these)?
6. Budget and timeline for a formal clearance search on RAXX?
7. Is there a risk that "Raxx" reads too close to any existing mark in the financial or software spaces (ACH, FINRA, options-trading)? A knock-out search should answer this; we want it on the record before the attorney meeting.

Sources

1. USPTO — "Keeping your registration alive" (maintenance deadlines, grace period, §15 incontestability, Post-Registration Audit Program). https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/maintain/keeping-your-registration-alive
2. USPTO — fee schedule (37 CFR § 2.6 table, electronic vs. paper, all post-registration fees cited above). https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/fees-and-payment/uspto-fee-schedule
3. USPTO — "Apply online" (confirms Trademark Center replaced TEAS as of January 18, 2025, and is now the only way to file). https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/apply
4. USPTO TSDR (status + document retrieval by serial/registration number). https://tsdr.uspto.gov/
5. USPTO Trademark Search (public search UI, replaced TESS). https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/

MOOSEQUEST record — completed from manual TSDR lookup (2026-04-22)

Do not act on anything in this document without first consulting a trademark attorney admitted to practice before the USPTO. This document is preparation material only.