USPTO serial 73676650
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
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.
VANCOUVER, B.C., CA
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
ROBERT D. LITOWITZ
ROBERT D LITOWITZ FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, ET AL1300 I ST N WWASHINGTON, DC 20005-3315UNITED STATES| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 007 | MACHINES FOR MIXING AND DISPENSING WINE COOLERS, CARBONATED FRUIT DRINKS, AND OTHER CARBONATED BEVERAGES | ABANDONED | Oct 30, 1986 |
| 033 | WINE COOLERS | ABANDONED | Oct 30, 1986 |
| 042 | RETAIL STORE SERVICES IN THE FIELD OF WINE COOLERS, CARBONATED FRUIT DRINKS, AND OTHER CARBONATED BEVERAGES | ABANDONED | Oct 30, 1986 |
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 1992 | ABN1 | ABANDONMENT - EXPRESS MAILED | — |
| Mar 4, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 5, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 1, 1991 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 6, 1990 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 16, 1990 | 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 2, 1990 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 2, 1990 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 29, 1989 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 25, 1989 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 26, 1989 | 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. |
| Jun 6, 1989 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 1989 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 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. |
| Nov 10, 1988 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 23, 1988 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 12, 1988 | 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. |
| Nov 9, 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. |
| Oct 28, 1987 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |