USPTO serial 76284454
DOMESTIC DIVAS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- NEVILLE, BRIAN
- 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 DOMESTIC DIVAS?
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.
ADAM BIALEK
ADAM BIALEK WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, ET AL.3 GANNETT DRWHITE PLAINS, NY 10604-3407UNITED 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Domestic Divas, Inc.
- Other trademarks owned by Domestic Divas, Inc.
- Other trademarks in Class 007
- Other trademarks in Class 008
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Similar marks named DOMESTIC DIVAS
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 21, 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. |
| Feb 20, 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. |
| Jul 11, 2005 | GNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL E-MAILED | — |
| Jul 11, 2005 | CNCF | SU - ACTION CONTINUING FINAL - WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 29, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 21, 2005 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 6, 2005 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Dec 6, 2004 | GNFR | FINAL REFUSAL E-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 6, 2004 | CNFR | SU - FINAL REFUSAL - WRITTEN | 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 2, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 19, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 4, 2004 | GNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION E-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 29, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Apr 28, 2004 | SUPC | STATEMENT OF USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 20, 2004 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Apr 20, 2004 | EISU | TEAS STATEMENT OF USE RECEIVED | The applicant filed a Statement of Use with specimens showing the mark in actual commerce. The USPTO will review the filing for compliance. If accepted, the mark can proceed to registration; if deficient, the USPTO may issue a requirement or office action. |
| Oct 21, 2003 | 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. |
| Jul 29, 2003 | 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. |
| Jul 28, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 9, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| May 28, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 29, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Mar 20, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 20, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 11, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 20, 2002 | 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. |
| Sep 17, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Jul 19, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 19, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 20, 2002 | 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 20, 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. |
| Sep 6, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 5, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |