USPTO serial 76290160
TEQUILA MICO GOLD
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHHINA, KARANENDRA S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 TEQUILA MICO GOLD?
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.
Michael S. Sherman
MICHAEL S SHERMAN JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MARMARO LLP1900 AVE OF THE STARS 7TH FLLOS ANGELES, CA 90067UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | DISTILLED SPIRITS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 5, 2005 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Mar 24, 2005 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Aug 25, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 25, 2004 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Aug 24, 2004 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Aug 13, 2004 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Jul 19, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 23, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 23, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 8, 2003 | ABN0 | ABANDONMENT - INCOMPLETE RESPONSE | — |
| Oct 22, 2003 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Aug 18, 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. |
| Jul 31, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 29, 2003 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jul 3, 2003 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 3, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 3, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 26, 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. |
| Aug 24, 2002 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 20, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 14, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 14, 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. |
| Oct 16, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 24, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |