USPTO serial 76428524
MONTMORILONITES BLEND FIGO NOBLESSE CLASSIC
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- CHARLON, BARNEY
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 105 - 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 MONTMORILONITES BLEND FIGO NOBLESSE CLASSIC?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Lisa D. Herbst, Esq.
LISA D HERBST ESQ WEBSTER, CHAMBERLAIN & BEAN1747 PENNSYLVANIA AVE N WWASHINGTON, DC 20006UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 034 | cut tobacco, cigarettes, chewing tobacco, cigars, tobacco, snuff, loess cigarette, cigarette containing clay minerals of loess | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 2005 | 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. |
| Jan 28, 2005 | 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 2, 2004 | 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 20, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| May 20, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 10, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 11, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jun 20, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 25, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 25, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 25, 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. |
| Sep 26, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |