USPTO serial 76600374
DON THE BEACHCOMBER
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- BOULTON, KELLY F
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 102 - EXAMINING ATTORNEY ASSIGNED
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 DON THE BEACHCOMBER?
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
LAS VEGAS, NV
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
JOHN JOSEPH HALL
1631 BEVERLY BLVDLOS ANGELES, CA 90026-5746UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES NAMELY RUM | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10, 2008 | MAB3 | ABANDONMENT NOTICE MAILED - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 10, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 8, 2008 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Aug 28, 2007 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Jun 29, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Jun 28, 2006 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT - COMPLETED | — |
| May 10, 2006 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Feb 21, 2006 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jan 23, 2006 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jan 20, 2006 | CNCF | ACTION CONTINUING A FINAL - COMPLETED | — |
| Aug 12, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Aug 12, 2005 | 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. |
| Aug 12, 2005 | CNFR | FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | 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. |
| Aug 8, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Aug 8, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 26, 2005 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Jul 21, 2005 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 21, 2005 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Feb 7, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 5, 2005 | 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. |
| Feb 4, 2005 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 14, 2004 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |