USPTO serial 77497740
VISSI D'ARTE 2006 CHATEAU KEFRAYA MIS EN BOUTEILLE AU CHATEAU CHATEAU KEFRAYA VALLEE DE LA BEKAA LIBAN
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- REINHART, MEGHAN M
- Law office
- TMEG LAW OFFICE 108 - 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 VISSI D'ARTE 2006 CHATEAU KEFRAYA MIS EN BOUTEILLE AU CHATEAU CHATEAU KEFRAYA VALLEE DE LA BEKAA LIBAN?
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
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Constance Golden
CONSTANCE GOLDEN ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB666 3RD AVENEW YORK, NY 10017-4011UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 033 | Alcoholic beverages and spirits, beverages | 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 CHATEAU KEFRAYA S.A.L.
- Other trademarks in Class 033
- Similar marks named VISSI D'ARTE 2006 CHATEAU KEFRAYA MIS EN BOUTEILLE AU CHATEAU CHATEAU KEFRAYA VALLEE DE LA BEKAA LIBAN
- Prosecution event MAB2 explained
- Recently changed USPTO trademarks
- Recently filed trademarks
- Browse all trademark records
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 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. |
| May 13, 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. |
| Oct 15, 2008 | 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. |
| Oct 14, 2008 | 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 19, 2008 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | TAEA | TEAS AMENDMENT ENTERED BEFORE ATTORNEY ASSIGNED | — |
| Jul 22, 2008 | PARI | TEAS VOLUNTARY AMENDMENT RECEIVED | — |
| Jun 17, 2008 | MDSC | NOTICE OF DESIGN SEARCH CODE MAILED | — |
| Jun 16, 2008 | NWAP | NEW APPLICATION ENTERED | — |