USPTO serial 76331620
JUVIA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHARPER JR, SAM
- 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 JUVIA?
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.
Joseph Diamante
JOSEPH DIAMANTE ESQ JONES DAY222 E 41ST STNEW YORK, NY 11017UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NAMELY, FRUIT DRINKS, FRUIT JUICES, AND SOFT DRINKS; WATER, NAMELY, FLAVORED WATER, SPRING WATER, PURIFIED WATER, AND MINERAL WATER | 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 Harford, Margaret M.
- Other trademarks owned by Harford, Margaret M.
- Other trademarks owned by EON BEVERAGE GROUP, INC.
- Other trademarks in Class 032
- Similar marks named JUVIA
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 21, 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. |
| Dec 21, 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. |
| May 4, 2005 | EX4G | SOU EXTENSION 4 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | EXT4 | SOU EXTENSION 4 FILED | — |
| Apr 11, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 4, 2004 | EX3G | SOU EXTENSION 3 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 13, 2004 | EXT3 | SOU EXTENSION 3 FILED | — |
| Oct 13, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 23, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 23, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Apr 27, 2004 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Apr 23, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Apr 9, 2004 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Apr 9, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 6, 2003 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Oct 6, 2003 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Oct 6, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 15, 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. |
| Jan 21, 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. |
| Jan 1, 2003 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Nov 9, 2002 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Oct 25, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Oct 24, 2002 | REIN | REINSTATED | — |
| Aug 29, 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 31, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 31, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 29, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 28, 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. |
| Jan 16, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |