USPTO serial 75554471
LA LLAVE DEL PUEBLO
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ALI, STEPHANIE MARIE
- 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 LA LLAVE DEL PUEBLO?
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.
Frank C. Turner (IFSA,016)
FRANK C TURNER (IFSA,016) VADEN, EICKENROHT & THOMPSON, LLPONE RIVERWAY, STE 1100HOUSTON, TX 77056-1982UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 035 | MARKETING SERVICES PROMOTING CONSUMER GOODS AND SERVICES OF OTHERS THROUGH DIRECT MAILING, TELEMARKETING, PRINT ADVERTISING, EVENT SPONSORSHIPS, RADIO AND TELEVISION ADVERTISING ON A GLOBAL COMPUTER NETWORK | ACTIVE | — |
| 036 | INSURANCE FINANCIAL SERVICES, NAMELY, FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND CONSULTATION, BROKERAGE OF LIFE INSURANCE, ANNUITIES AND MUTUAL FUNDS; AND MORTGAGE LENDING | ACTIVE | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 2, 2002 | PETD | PETITION TO REVIVE-DENIED | — |
| Nov 5, 2001 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 31, 2001 | 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 31, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 10, 2001 | CNRU | DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE MAILED | — |
| Jan 4, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 18, 2000 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Sep 11, 2000 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Mar 21, 2000 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 20, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 8, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 25, 1999 | 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. |
| May 13, 1999 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 2, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 29, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |