USPTO serial 76423819
D DOUBLE'
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- ROSSMAN, MARY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 109 - 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 D DOUBLE'?
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
36060 Romano d'Ezzelino (Vicenza), IT
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
John A. Clifford
JOHN A CLIFFORD MERCHANT & GOULD PCP O BOX 2910MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-0910UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 014 | Precious metals in general and their alloys; jewelry; precious stones; horological and chronometric instruments, namely watches and clocks | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 2006 | 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. |
| Feb 22, 2006 | 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 26, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jul 25, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 24, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jan 21, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 9, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 9, 2004 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 16, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 16, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 12, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Dec 9, 2003 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| May 15, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 14, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 14, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 13, 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. |
| Nov 4, 2002 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Sep 27, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |