USPTO serial 75514547
DIVA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- MIZELLE HOWARD, DEZMONA JULYE
- 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 DIVA?
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.
ROCKY WILBER
ROCKY WILBER ISAACSON ROSENBAUM WOODS & LEVY12034 E HOYE DRAURORA, CO 80012-3293UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 028 | Dolls and doll accessories | ACTIVE | Jan 11, 2003 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 3, 2004 | UNDN | UNDELIVERABLE MAIL - NO ACTION TAKEN | — |
| Sep 3, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 19, 2004 | 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 16, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 5, 2003 | 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 21, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 20, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 18, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 2003 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| May 20, 2003 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 20, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Dec 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 19, 2002 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Dec 19, 2002 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 19, 2002 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Dec 18, 2002 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 18, 2002 | PETL | COMMUNICATION RECEIVED FROM PETITIONER | — |
| Nov 18, 2002 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Nov 14, 2002 | PINM | INCOMPLETE PETITION NOTICE MAILED | — |
| Oct 9, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 9, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 14, 2002 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Aug 13, 2002 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 28, 2002 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Jun 18, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Dec 18, 2001 | NOAM | NOA MAILED - SOU REQUIRED FROM APPLICANT | A Notice of Allowance means your intent-to-use application cleared examination and opposition but is not registered yet. You must file a Statement of Use showing the mark in commerce, or request an extension, before the deadline — usually six months from the notice date. |
| Sep 25, 2001 | PUBO | PUBLISHED FOR OPPOSITION | Your mark was published in the USPTO Official Gazette for a 30-day opposition window. During that period, third parties who believe they would be harmed can file an opposition. If no opposition is filed, prosecution usually continues toward registration or a Notice of Allowance. |
| Sep 5, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 29, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 15, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 29, 2001 | 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. |
| Jan 3, 2001 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 8, 2000 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 5, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 24, 2000 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 17, 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. |
| Dec 15, 1998 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |