USPTO serial 75307420
TAHOE BEER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LORENZO, ROBERT
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 111 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 TAHOE BEER?
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.
KIM MUELLER
MARK R LEONARD DAVIS & LEONARD LLP8880 CAL CTR DR STE 180SACRAMENTO, CA 95826UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | beer | ACTIVE | Sep 30, 1997 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 13, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 9, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Nov 23, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 23, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| May 13, 2005 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| May 13, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 13, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 20, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jul 20, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 15, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 27, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 1, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 1, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 1, 2000 | 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. |
| May 10, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 9, 1998 | 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. |
| Aug 13, 1998 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 10, 1998 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Dec 10, 1997 | 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 1, 1997 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |