USPTO serial 76184666
PRICESMART
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROSSMAN, MARY
- 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 PRICESMART?
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.
Katherine M. Hoffman
KATHERINE M HOFFMAN LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP600 W BROADWAY STE 2600SAN DIEGO, CA 92101UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 21, 2006 | 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. |
| Aug 28, 2006 | CORV | REVIEW OF CORRESPONDENCE COMPLETE | — |
| Jun 21, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 21, 2006 | PCDE | PETITION TO DIRECTOR DENIED | — |
| Feb 23, 2006 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Feb 23, 2006 | DPCC | DIVISIONAL PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Feb 17, 2006 | PGEX | PETITION GRANTED - EXTENSION REQUEST FILED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | DRRR | DIVISIONAL REQUEST RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | PCRC | PETITION TO DIRECTOR RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 24, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 19, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 18, 2006 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 26, 2005 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 18, 2005 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Jul 18, 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. |
| Jan 18, 2005 | 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 26, 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. |
| Oct 6, 2004 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 20, 2004 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 18, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 10, 2004 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 23, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Nov 20, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jan 31, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 7, 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. |
| Apr 23, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 17, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |