USPTO serial 76282683
HERMITAGE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- STRASER, RICHARD
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 HERMITAGE?
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.
Gary A. Hecker
GARY A HECKER CENTURYTHE HECKER LAW GROUP1925 CENTURY PARK E STE 2300LOS ANGELES, CA 90067-2724Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 042 | hotels, restaurants, hotel concierge services, bar services, security guard services, beauty salons, health spas, massage, catering services, providing facilities for conventions, banquets, social functions, fund raising, and special events | 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.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 7, 2006 | MAB2 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - FAILURE TO RESPOND | 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. |
| Jun 7, 2006 | 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. |
| Jun 5, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 23, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Nov 9, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Oct 28, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Feb 25, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 16, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 18, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Feb 27, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 23, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Mar 1, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 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. |
| Aug 30, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Aug 28, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |