USPTO serial 76310331
VIUDA DE ROMERO DESDE 1852 TEQUILA ANEJO 150
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- LORENZO, ROBERT
- Law office
- INTENT TO USE SECTION
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 VIUDA DE ROMERO DESDE 1852 TEQUILA ANEJO 150?
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
11560 Mexico D.F., MX
11560 Mexico D.F., MX
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
H. John Campaign
ADAM TRACY PERNOD RICARD USA LLC777 WESTCHESTER AVEWHITE PLAINS, NY 10604UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | Tequilas | 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.
- Other trademarks owned by Pernod Ricard Mexico SA de CV
- Other trademarks owned by Pernod Ricard Mexico SA de CV
- Other trademarks in Class 033
- Similar marks named VIUDA DE ROMERO DESDE 1852 TEQUILA ANEJO 150
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 27, 2005 | MAB6 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Sep 27, 2005 | ABN6 | ABANDONMENT - NO USE STATEMENT FILED | The intent-to-use application was abandoned because no acceptable Statement of Use (or valid extension) was filed before the Notice of Allowance deadline expired. The application is dead unless revived within a limited window. |
| Jul 7, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 10, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Nov 3, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Nov 3, 2004 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| May 19, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 11, 2004 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| May 11, 2004 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| May 11, 2004 | EEXT | SOU TEAS EXTENSION RECEIVED | The applicant requested more time to file a Statement of Use before the Notice of Allowance deadline. Each extension typically adds six months. A limited number of extensions are available for intent-to-use applications not yet in use. |
| Nov 11, 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. |
| Aug 19, 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 30, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Jun 18, 2003 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Jun 17, 2003 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT MAILED | — |
| May 22, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 22, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 29, 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. |
| Nov 8, 2002 | PETG | PETITION TO REVIVE-GRANTED | — |
| Oct 11, 2002 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 11, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 9, 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. |
| Jul 29, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 5, 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. |
| Nov 26, 2001 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |