USPTO serial 74301061
RIO GRANDE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRONT, MITCHELL
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with RIO GRANDE?
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.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mayda Colon Tsaknis
200 N ADAMS STROCKVILLE, MD 20850UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 029 | dried beans, refried beans, sour cream, sausages, jams, jellies and mango pickles | ABANDONED | — |
| 030 | rice, condiments, corn tortillas, cornmeals, spice mix consisting of cumin, paprika, black pepper, dried garlic, dried onions and salt | ABANDONED | — |
| 032 | natural juice powder, coconut water | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 26, 1997 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Aug 26, 1997 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| May 27, 1997 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Feb 26, 1996 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 25, 1995 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Apr 6, 1995 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | A final Office Action (final refusal) means the examining attorney is maintaining at least one refusal and your options are narrower. You can file a response addressing the refusal, appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or let the application abandon. |
| Feb 17, 1995 | CNEA | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 1995 | 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 16, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 17, 1994 | 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. |
| Sep 28, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 10, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 18, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 12, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 2, 1993 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 30, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 13, 1992 | 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. |
| Sep 28, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 28, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |