USPTO serial 75979825
AMAZING GRACE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BROWN, BRIAN
- 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 AMAZING GRACE?
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
Clark Summit, PA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
CHARLES N QUINN
CHARLES N QUINN FOX, ROTHSCHILD, O'BRIEN & FRANKEL, LLP2000 MARKET ST 10TH FLPHILADELPHIA, PA 19103UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 004 | Candles candles in the nature of boxed votives and tapers and pillars | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 9, 2004 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 8, 2004 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 4, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 26, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jan 23, 2004 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Feb 7, 2002 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Oct 5, 2001 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2001 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jun 12, 2001 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 4, 2000 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 27, 2000 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Dec 9, 1999 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 1999 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 24, 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. |
| Mar 19, 1999 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |