USPTO serial 76431326
RENDEZVOUS RECORDS
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- FICKES, JERI J
- 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 RENDEZVOUS RECORDS?
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
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Kenneth A. Feinswog
KENNETH A FEINSWOG6100 CENTER DR STE 630LOS ANGELES, CA 90045UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 009 | Pre-recorded videocassettes, audiocassettes, compact discs, phonograph records, CD-ROMs and DVDs, featuring musical performances | ACTIVE | — |
| 041 | Motion picture, television program and digital program production and distribution; record production services and sound recording services | 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 Koz, Dave
- Other trademarks owned by Koz, Dave
- Other trademarks owned by Katz, Hyman
- Other trademarks owned by Katz, Hyman
- Other trademarks owned by Cody, Frank
- Other trademarks owned by Cody, Frank
- Other trademarks in Class 009
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named RENDEZVOUS RECORDS
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2007 | 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 6, 2007 | 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 9, 2007 | 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. |
| Oct 17, 2006 | 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. |
| Sep 27, 2006 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Aug 30, 2006 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 25, 2006 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Aug 24, 2006 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Aug 10, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 3, 2006 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 3, 2006 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jan 30, 2006 | GPRA | PRIORITY ACTION E-MAILED | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 30, 2006 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION WRITTEN | A priority action is a type of Office Action the USPTO treats as time-sensitive. It usually means the examining attorney needs a specific response or amendment quickly — often relating to a foreign priority claim or a formal requirement. Respond within the stated deadline. |
| Jan 9, 2006 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Jul 5, 2005 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Dec 30, 2004 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 30, 2004 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Nov 18, 2004 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 8, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 21, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 20, 2004 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| May 14, 2004 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| May 3, 2004 | 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. |
| Mar 17, 2004 | CFIT | CASE FILE IN TICRS | — |
| Jul 31, 2003 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Jun 13, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 13, 2003 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 6, 2003 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 11, 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. |
| Dec 4, 2002 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |