Drawing for BLACK HAWK STOUT

USPTO serial 76026048

BLACK HAWK STOUT

Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group

Status 603
Filing date
Status date
Registration date
—
Examiner
HUGHITT, ELIZABETH
Law office
FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)

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 BLACK HAWK STOUT?

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.

Tony Vecino

TONY VECINO COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS, LLP222 KEARNY ST 7TH FLSAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108UNITED STATES

Goods and services

ClassDescriptionStatusFirst use
032Malt beverages, namely, beer, ale and stoutACTIVE—

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

DateCodeEventWhat it means
Nov 12, 2003CFITCASE FILE IN TICRS—
Nov 6, 2003JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Nov 6, 2003EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Nov 6, 2003EXPTEXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED—
Jul 17, 2003ABN3ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL—
Jul 17, 2003EXPAEX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED—
Sep 27, 2002CNESEXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED—
Jul 23, 2002EXAFEXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB—
May 2, 2002RECDACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED—
Mar 12, 2002JURTJURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY—
Mar 12, 2002EXPIEX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED—
Jan 2, 2002CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Jul 2, 2001CNFRFINAL REFUSAL MAILEDA 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 15, 2001CRFACORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE—
Aug 16, 2000CNRTNON-FINAL ACTION MAILEDA 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.
Jul 19, 2000DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—
Jul 13, 2000DOCKASSIGNED TO EXAMINER—

Frequently asked questions

Related guidance