USPTO serial 76012156
MAYAN RESORTS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LE, KHANH M
- 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 MAYAN RESORTS?
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.
SCOTT ERIKSON
SCOTT R ERIKSON INTERSERVE BUSINESS SERVICES INC4104 SAVANNAH CTCOLLEYVILLE, TX 76034UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 037 | Real estate and timeshare development and maintenance of real estate properties | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Desarrollo Marina Vallarta, S.A. de C.V.
- Other trademarks owned by Desarrollo Marina Vallarta, S.A. de C.V.
- Other trademarks in Class 037
- Similar marks named MAYAN RESORTS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 15, 2008 | 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 13, 2007 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 16, 2007 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 16, 2007 | 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 14, 2007 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 24, 2007 | TPEX | SOU EXTENSION RECEIVED WITH TEAS PETITION | — |
| May 24, 2007 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| May 24, 2007 | PROA | TEAS PETITION TO REVIVE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Apr 17, 2007 | 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. |
| Feb 8, 2007 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Aug 8, 2006 | 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. |
| May 16, 2006 | 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. |
| Apr 26, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 24, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 23, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Mar 6, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 8, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 26, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| May 28, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Dec 10, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 14, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Feb 16, 2001 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 17, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 17, 2001 | 1.BA | Sec. 1(B) CLAIM ADDED | — |
| Sep 19, 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. |
| Sep 14, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 5, 2000 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |