USPTO serial 75648915
BEME
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BEVERLY, JOSETTE MICHELLE
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 BEME?
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.
Andrew M. Abrams
Andrew M. Abrams Fish & Richardson P.C.P.O. Box 1022Minneapolis, MN 55440-1022UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 021 | Pot racks and candleholders not made of precious metal | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 18, 2009 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Nov 18, 2009 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 19, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 22, 2007 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 27, 2005 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Dec 27, 2005 | 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. |
| Jul 11, 2005 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | IROA | RESPONSE TO ITU OFFICE ACTION ENTERED | — |
| Jun 30, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 6, 2005 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 2, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 14, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 3, 2005 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - 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. |
| Feb 3, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 10, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 21, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 4, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 27, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 21, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Apr 21, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 21, 2003 | 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. |
| Jul 29, 2003 | 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. |
| Jul 9, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 22, 2003 | IUCN | NOTICE OF ALLOWANCE CANCELLED | — |
| Oct 22, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 30, 2002 | 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. |
| Jul 10, 2002 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 29, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| May 24, 2002 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| May 24, 2002 | PCGR | PETITION TO DIRECTOR GRANTED | — |
| May 24, 2001 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 26, 2001 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Mar 26, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 24, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 23, 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. |
| Feb 17, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 18, 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. |
| Aug 12, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |