USPTO serial 73625467
MURANO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- O LEAR, JANICE
- 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 MURANO?
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
FRANCA-SP-14.400, BR
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
LESLIE BERTAGNOLLI
LESLIE BERTAGNOLLI BAKER & MCKENZIEONE PRUDENTIAL PLZCHICAGO, IL 60601UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 025 | SHOES | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 19, 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. |
| Aug 2, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 19, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 16, 1989 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 16, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 12, 1988 | ZZZZ | ALLOWANCE/COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Oct 12, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 18, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 29, 1988 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| May 23, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 6, 1988 | 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. |
| Apr 25, 1988 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 4, 1988 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 14, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 21, 1987 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 27, 1987 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 24, 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 15, 1986 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |