USPTO serial 74800625
AUSTRALIAN GOLD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 614
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- APPLEWHITE, FRANCINE L
- 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 AUSTRALIAN GOLD?
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
NORTH VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA, CA
Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | beer; non-alcoholic beer; non-alcoholic fruit based beverages; namely, de-alcohoized wine combined with one or more of the juices of oranges, apples, mangoes, passion fruit, pineapples, tomatoes and prunes | ABANDONED | Mar 16, 1988 |
| 033 | ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NAMELY WINES AND BEERS | ABANDONED | Mar 16, 1989 |
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 31, 1994 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Sep 7, 1993 | PILM | PETITION INQUIRY LETTER ISSUED | — |
| Jul 20, 1993 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 10, 1993 | 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 3, 1992 | UNPR | UNRESPONSIVE/DUPLICATE PAPER RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 9, 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. |
| Jun 15, 1992 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Oct 29, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 29, 1991 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 8, 1991 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 15, 1991 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 19, 1990 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 12, 1990 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 28, 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. |