USPTO serial 76234735
BEACON DRIVE-IN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- AMOS, TANYA L
- 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 BEACON DRIVE-IN?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
J. Bennett Mullinax
J BENNETT MULLINAX DORITY & MANNING, PAP O BOX 1449GREENVILLE, SC 29602-1449UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 030 | iced tea | ACTIVE | Dec 1, 1960 |
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 22, 2003 | ABN2 | ABANDONMENT - FAILURE TO RESPOND OR LATE RESPONSE | The trademark application was abandoned because a required response or document was not filed by the deadline — usually a missed Office Action response. The application is dead unless a petition to revive is granted within a limited time. |
| Sep 9, 2003 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 13, 2003 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Dec 12, 2002 | RECD | ACTION DENYING REQ FOR RECON MAILED | — |
| Dec 12, 2002 | ZZZY | PREVIOUS ACTION COUNT WITHDRAWN | — |
| Nov 19, 2002 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Nov 19, 2002 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 19, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 19, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 9, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 18, 2002 | 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. |
| Dec 26, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 19, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 19, 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. |
| Jun 15, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |