USPTO serial 75862109
VINOS DE BUENAVENTURA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- EULIN, INGRID C
- 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 VINOS DE BUENAVENTURA?
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.
HAROLD C. HOHBACH
EDWARD N BACHAND DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP4 EMBARCADERO CTR STE 3400SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111-4187UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | Wine | ACTIVE | Jan 16, 2004 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 6, 2005 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jun 6, 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. |
| Nov 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Nov 2, 2004 | CNRT | SU - NON-FINAL ACTION - WRITTEN | 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 23, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Aug 10, 2004 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Apr 29, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 13, 2004 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 13, 2004 | FAXX | FAX RECEIVED | — |
| Mar 19, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Mar 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 10, 2003 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 12, 2003 | 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. |
| Sep 19, 2003 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| May 7, 2003 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Mar 18, 2003 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Mar 18, 2003 | 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 24, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 8, 2002 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Sep 19, 2002 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Sep 19, 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. |
| Mar 19, 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. |
| Aug 10, 2001 | ETOF | EXTENSION OF TIME TO OPPOSE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 24, 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. |
| Jul 11, 2001 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jan 15, 2001 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Nov 16, 2000 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 23, 2000 | 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 2, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |