USPTO serial 76292112
WISMILAK DIPLOMAT
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FRENCH, CURTIS W
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 115 - 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 WISMILAK DIPLOMAT?
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
Tandes Surabaya 60185, ID
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JOHN CLARKE HOLMAN
JOHN CLARKE HOLMAN JACOBSON HOLMAN PLLC400 7TH ST NWWASHINGTON, DC 20004-2237UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 034 | CIGARETTES AND CIGARS | ACTIVE | Jan 2, 1997 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 13, 2008 | 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. |
| Nov 13, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 17, 2008 | 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 16, 2008 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION WRITTEN | 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. |
| Feb 29, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 29, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 5, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 24, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 24, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 29, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Mar 8, 2005 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Aug 3, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jun 15, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jun 15, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 15, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 15, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 10, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 10, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 24, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Sep 23, 2003 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 7, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Aug 8, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 8, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 18, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 18, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Dec 5, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 30, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 30, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 10, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 1, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 25, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 15, 2001 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 25, 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 7, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |