USPTO serial 73617132
STE. CHAPELLE THE IDAHO WINERY
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STINE, DAVID
- 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 STE. CHAPELLE THE IDAHO WINERY?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JOHN E. BENOIT
JOHN E BENOIT BENOIT, SMITH & LAUGHLINSTE 5012001 JEFFERSON DAVIS HWYARLINGTON, VA 22202Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | WINE | ABANDONED | Jul 27, 1984 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 30, 1991 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 1991 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 30, 1990 | 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 23, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 7, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 22, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 13, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 9, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 13, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 9, 1989 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 5, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 8, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 15, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 16, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 9, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 22, 1987 | 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. |
| Jul 13, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 15, 1987 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 23, 1986 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 3, 1986 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |