USPTO serial 76549823
BLUE GROVE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- KEAM, ALEX S
- Law office
- TMO LAW OFFICE 114 - 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 BLUE GROVE?
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
Philadelphia, 7304, ZA
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Frank P. Presta
FRANK P PRESTA NIXON & VANDERHYE11TH FL901 N GLEBE RDARLINGTON, VA 22203Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NAMELY WINE, SPIRITS DISTILLED FROM GRAPES AND LIQUEURS | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 3, 2009 | 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. |
| Aug 3, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 23, 2008 | GNR1 | NOTIFICATION OF DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | GNRU | DISAPPROVAL - AMENDMENT TO USE E-MAILED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | AAUD | AMENDMENT OF ALLEGED USE DISAPPROVED | — |
| Dec 23, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 17, 2008 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Dec 17, 2008 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Dec 16, 2008 | EAAU | TEAS AMENDMENT OF USE RECEIVED | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | GNS3 | NOTIFICATION OF LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Sep 11, 2008 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Sep 4, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Apr 4, 2008 | GNS2 | NOTIFICATION OF INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2008 | GNSI | INQUIRY TO SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Apr 4, 2008 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 1, 2008 | RCCK | SUSPENSION CHECKED - TO ATTORNEY FOR ACTION | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Oct 1, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Feb 2, 2007 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Jul 21, 2006 | RCSC | REPORT COMPLETED SUSPENSION CHECK CASE STILL SUSPENDED | — |
| Jan 11, 2006 | GNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION E-MAILED | — |
| Jan 11, 2006 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Jan 3, 2006 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 16, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Nov 9, 2005 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Oct 7, 2005 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 6, 2005 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 18, 2005 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | CNSL | SUSPENSION LETTER WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 17, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 13, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Oct 29, 2004 | CNSI | INQUIRY AS TO SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Oct 29, 2004 | CNSI | SUSPENSION INQUIRY WRITTEN | — |
| Apr 16, 2004 | CNSL | LETTER OF SUSPENSION MAILED | — |
| Apr 15, 2004 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |