USPTO serial 77197304
CHRISTO AND JEANNE-CLAUDE: THE MASTABA, PROJECT FOR THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 606
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- GENOVESE, CARRIE A
- 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 CHRISTO AND JEANNE-CLAUDE: THE MASTABA, PROJECT FOR THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES?
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
New York, NY
New York, NY
New York, NY
New York, NY
New York, NY
New York, NY
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Mark A. Paskar
MARK A. PASKAR BRYAN CAVE LLP211 N BROADWAY STE 3400SAINT LOUIS, MO 63102-2711UNITED STATESGoods and services
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 Javacheff, Jeanne-Claude
- Other trademarks owned by Javacheff, Jeanne-Claude
- Other trademarks owned by Javacheff, Christo
- Other trademarks owned by Javacheff, Christo
- Other trademarks owned by CVJ Corporation
- Other trademarks owned by CVJ Corporation
- Other trademarks in Class 016
- Other trademarks in Class 041
- Similar marks named CHRISTO AND JEANNE-CLAUDE: THE MASTABA, PROJECT FOR THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
- Prosecution event MAB6 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 29, 2010 | 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. |
| Mar 29, 2010 | 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. |
| Aug 25, 2009 | 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. |
| Jun 2, 2009 | 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. |
| May 13, 2009 | NPUB | NOTICE OF PUBLICATION | — |
| Apr 30, 2009 | PREV | LAW OFFICE PUBLICATION REVIEW COMPLETED | — |
| Apr 30, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 23, 2009 | CNSA | APPROVED FOR PUB - PRINCIPAL REGISTER | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 21, 2009 | ALIE | ASSIGNED TO LIE | — |
| Apr 20, 2009 | ERFR | TEAS REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION RECEIVED | — |
| Dec 11, 2008 | 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. |
| Dec 11, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 13, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Oct 13, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Oct 13, 2008 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Apr 15, 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. |
| Apr 15, 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. |
| Mar 11, 2008 | TEME | TEAS/EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE ENTERED | — |
| Mar 10, 2008 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Mar 10, 2008 | TROA | TEAS RESPONSE TO OFFICE ACTION RECEIVED | This event means the applicant filed a response to a USPTO Office Action — typically arguments, amendments, or evidence addressing the examiner's objections. The USPTO will review the response and either allow the mark to proceed or issue another action. |
| Sep 12, 2007 | CPRA | PRIORITY ACTION 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. |
| Sep 12, 2007 | 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. |
| Sep 12, 2007 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jun 8, 2007 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |