USPTO serial 76125305
BAJA SLAMMERS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FOSDICK, GEOFFREY A
- 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 BAJA SLAMMERS?
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.
LAWRENCE E. ABELMAN
LAWRENCE E ABELMAN ABELMAN FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 3RD AVENEW YORK, NY 10017-5621UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | Prepared alcoholic cocktails containing tequila | 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 Tequila Cuervo La Rojena, S.A. De C.V.
- Other trademarks owned by Tequila Cuervo La Rojena, S.A. De C.V.
- Other trademarks in Class 033
- Similar marks named BAJA SLAMMERS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 14, 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. |
| Mar 14, 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. |
| Jun 28, 2006 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 28, 2006 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2006 | 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 21, 2006 | CHAN | APPLICANT/CORRESPONDENCE CHANGES (NON-RESPONSIVE) ENTERED | — |
| Feb 7, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 22, 2005 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Dec 22, 2005 | 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 28, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jun 28, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2005 | 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. |
| Dec 28, 2004 | 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. |
| Oct 5, 2004 | 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. |
| Sep 15, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 2, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 30, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 30, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 30, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 18, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 16, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 6, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 9, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Aug 28, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 28, 2001 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |