USPTO serial 76687523
GRACE
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- SHOSHO II, ERNEST
- Law office
- LAW OFFICE 117 - 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 GRACE?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Stephen E. Feldman
Stephen E. Feldman Feldman Law Group, P.C.220 East 42nd StreetSuite 3304New York, NY 10017Goods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 014 | diamonds at wholesale | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 22, 2010 | TCCA | TEAS CHANGE OF CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 9, 2010 | 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. |
| Jul 9, 2010 | 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. |
| Jun 30, 2010 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Jun 30, 2010 | EXFB | EXPARTE APPEAL DISMISSED - FAILURE TO FILE BRIEF | — |
| Mar 8, 2010 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2010 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL MAILED | — |
| Mar 8, 2010 | CFRC | SUBSEQUENT FINAL REFUSAL WRITTEN | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Feb 12, 2010 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jan 25, 2010 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jul 23, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 23, 2009 | 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. |
| Jul 21, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Jul 21, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | JURT | JURISDICTION RESTORED TO EXAMINING ATTORNEY | — |
| Jul 20, 2009 | EXAF | EXPARTE APPEAL RECEIVED AT TTAB | — |
| Jan 22, 2009 | 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. |
| Jan 22, 2009 | 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. |
| Dec 31, 2008 | ACEC | AMENDMENT FROM APPLICANT ENTERED | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Dec 31, 2008 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Dec 15, 2008 | PAPER RECEIVED | — | |
| Jun 19, 2008 | 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. |
| Jun 18, 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. |
| Jun 18, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Mar 18, 2008 | MAFR | APPLICATION FILING RECEIPT MAILED | — |
| Mar 14, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |