USPTO serial 76367327
STOLICHNAYA
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DELGIZZI, RONALD ERNEST
- 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 STOLICHNAYA?
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
Luxembourg, LU
Allied Domecq International Holdings BV
4870 AR Etten-Leur, NL
Other trademarks owned by Allied Domecq International Holdings BV
Allied Domecq International Holdings BV
4870 AR Etten-Leur, NL
Other trademarks owned by Allied Domecq International Holdings BV
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Bingham B. Leverich, Esq.
Bingham B. Leverich, Esq. Covington & Burling LLP1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Washington, DC 20004UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 032 | Brewed malt-based ready-to-drink alcoholic beverage in the nature of a flavored beer | 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 SPIRITS INTERNATIONAL B.V.
- Other trademarks owned by Allied Domecq International Holdings BV
- Other trademarks owned by Allied Domecq International Holdings BV
- Other trademarks in Class 032
- Similar marks named STOLICHNAYA
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 2010 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2010 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 2010 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 23, 2009 | EX2G | SOU EXTENSION 2 GRANTED | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | EXT2 | SOU EXTENSION 2 FILED | — |
| Jul 22, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 2, 2008 | EX1G | SOU EXTENSION 1 GRANTED | — |
| Dec 1, 2008 | AITU | CASE ASSIGNED TO INTENT TO USE PARALEGAL | — |
| Nov 25, 2008 | EXT1 | SOU EXTENSION 1 FILED | — |
| Nov 25, 2008 | 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. |
| Aug 6, 2008 | ARAA | ATTORNEY/DOM.REP.REVOKED AND/OR APPOINTED | 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. |
| Aug 6, 2008 | REAP | TEAS REVOKE/APP/CHANGE ADDR OF ATTY/DOM REP RECEIVED | — |
| Aug 6, 2008 | ASGN | AUTOMATIC UPDATE OF ASSIGNMENT OF OWNERSHIP | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 29, 2008 | 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. |
| Apr 9, 2008 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Mar 26, 2008 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | XAEC | EXAMINER'S AMENDMENT ENTERED | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | GNEN | NOTIFICATION OF EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | GNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT E-MAILED | — |
| Mar 25, 2008 | CNEA | EXAMINERS AMENDMENT -WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 26, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 26, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Feb 19, 2008 | PGRR | PETITION GRANTED - RESPONSE RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 6, 2007 | APET | ASSIGNED TO PETITION STAFF | — |
| Nov 26, 2007 | PETR | PETITION TO REVIVE-RECEIVED | — |
| Nov 26, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 29, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 4, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Oct 4, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 3, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Aug 21, 2007 | GAUN | NOTIFICATION OF NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2007 | GAUD | NOTICE OF UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - E-MAILED | — |
| Aug 21, 2007 | NAUD | REPORT UNRESPONSIVE AMENDMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 2, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 1, 2007 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 30, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 30, 2007 | 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. |
| Jan 5, 2007 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jan 5, 2007 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 5, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 4, 2006 | 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. |
| Oct 10, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jun 19, 2006 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jun 5, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Mar 28, 2006 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Feb 14, 2006 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 2, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Apr 5, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Nov 12, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 7, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Aug 30, 2004 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 14, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Oct 9, 2003 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Dec 6, 2002 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 31, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 31, 2002 | 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. |
| Oct 23, 2002 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 10, 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. |
| May 9, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| May 7, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |