USPTO serial 73559320
SAN SIMON
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- —
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
These status codes mean the trademark application is abandoned and no longer pending. Common reasons include missing an Office Action response (600), filing without a valid basis (602), express abandonment by the applicant (604), or failure to respond to an examiner's inquiry (618). Revival may be possible in limited circumstances. If abandonment was unintentional, consult counsel about a petition to revive. Otherwise file a new application if protection is still needed.
Need help with SAN SIMON?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Owner
JUMILLA (MURCIA), ES
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
V.M. CREEDON
V M CREEDON WENDEROTH, LIND & PONACKSTE 700805 FIFTEEN ST N WWASHINGTON, DC 20005Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | WINES | ABANDONED | — |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 1994 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Apr 21, 1994 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 15, 1994 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 30, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 16, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 16, 1993 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 14, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 1, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 11, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 12, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 6, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 31, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 15, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 1988 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 14, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 9, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 31, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 5, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 15, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 23, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 23, 1986 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 9, 1986 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 18, 1985 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Nov 21, 1985 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |